Public asset management companies in East Asia - Case studies1

Ben Fung, Jason George, Stefan Hohl and Guonan Ma

1

The authors would like to thank Bob McCauley, Josef Tošovský and Shinichi Yoshikuni for their many useful comments and suggestions during the various stages of the study. Comments from Masanori Ishizuka and … are gratefully acknowledged.

1

1. Chinese asset management corporations
1.1 Background The Chinese economy has been expanding fast over the past ten years, with its real GDP growth exceeding 8% and trade flows rising at 12% per annum. Nevertheless, China’s financial system is featured with a large but weak banking sector, with the total loans amounting to 150% of GDP and saddled with high levels of non-performing loans (NPLs) estimated to be around 40% of the total loans outstanding (both carved-out and remaining).2 China has been moving towards more economic liberalisation since 1978 when it was a still command-based planned economy. As part of the general market-oriented economic reforms, the government has incrementally initiated a series of important banking reforms since 1996, in order to restructure and strengthen the country’s weak banking system (Lardy (1998) and BIS (1999)). China’s recent entry into the WTO further adds to the urgency of accelerated bank restructuring. The four largest state-owned commercial banks (the big four banks) dominate the Chinese banking sector, accounting for nearly 70% of its total assets (Table 1). Naturally they have been the primary focus of the government’s banking reforms. One such ambitious banking reform was the establishment of four state-owned AMCs in 1999 — one for each of the big four banks — to take over and resolve problem assets. The Asian financial crisis might have helped convince the government to proactively deal with NPLs in the system. The principal legal basis for the four AMCs was an executive order issued by the State Council in 2000, after the actual setting up of the four AMCs. Although official speeches repeatedly mention about an expected 10-year life for the four AMCs, the State Council executive order does not explicitly stipulate the terms of the four AMCs.

Note: In calculating the China Construction Bank loan shares, the table takes into account that RMB100 billion of the assets transferred to Cinda are from China Development Bank and not from any of the big four banks. According to Cinda, the actual book value of the transferred NPLs reaches RMB395 billion instead of RMB373 billion. The difference could owe to the nonpolicy transfers on top of the policy carve-outs. Source: Ma and Fung (2002).

1.2 NPL acquisition The four AMCs have been specifically mandated to take over approximately RMB1.4 trillion (USD170 billion) in distressed assets from the big four banks, equivalent to around 20% of the combined loans outstanding of the big four banks or 18% of China’s GDP in 1998 (Table 1.1). This mandated NPL transfer, however, represents less than half of the estimated NPLs of the big four
2

The primary causes of the high NPL levels in the Chinese banking system are prolonged policy lending for more than five decades, rampant property speculation during the 1990s, a lax internal prudential lending policy and risk control system as well as poor financial performance of most state-owned companies.

2

banks at that time. The one-off transfer of RMB1.4 trillion in NPLs from the big four banks to the four AMCs mostly took place during 1999-2000. Each AMC is responsible for the NPL acquisition vis-à-vis its teamed up big four bank. There has been no more NPL acquisition by the AMCs since the transfer. Such NPL stripping out has been generally regarded as “policy-based” transfers. Both the size and the scope of the carved-out problem loans were pre-authorised by the central government, with the explicit aim to bring down the levels of NPLs remaining at the big four banks towards some targeted levels. The lion share of the transferred bank assets were loans extended before the yearend of 1995 and identified as non-performing by the yearend of 1998 when the government first started promoting commercially-based bank lending. This is an indication that the government is willing to take responsibility for the potential financial loss related to the earlier state-directed policy lending but not those NPLs incurred afterwards (Ma and Fung (2002)). The sectoral distribution of NPLs acquired by the AMCs is fairly diverse, with 47% for the manufacturing sector, 6% for the farm sector, 16% for the commercial sector and only 7% for the real estate sector. Reflecting the main policy objectives of the NPL transfer, the acquisition price of the transferred NPLs was set at a flat rate of book value for the entire block. To support this policy carve-out mission, the Chinese government explicitly approved the financing of the NPL acquisition (see 1.3). Given that the transfer of NPLs is priced at book value, the government has been concerned with the potential moral hazard problem and repeatedly vowed to have no more such policy-based transfers of NPLs. The primary mission of the four AMCs is to manage and dispose of the acquired NPLs, with an aim to maximise asset recovery while participating in the corporate restructuring related to the debt-for-equity swaps that amount to some 30% of the total policy transfer and involve some 500 large and heavily indebted state-owned enterprises. The main purpose of these debt-for-equity swaps appeared to be meeting the government’s goal of lifting these large state-owned enterprises to profitability within three years. Therefore, the four Chinese AMCs can be considered as some hybrids of decentralised and public funded rapid disposition agencies and medium-term restructuring instruments. In sum, the four AMCs were set up by the government as a pre-emptive measure to restructure and strengthen the Chinese banking system. 1.3 Financing Pricing the selected NPLs at book value highlights the important role of financing for such policy transfers, since the four AMCs would most likely bear most or all of the potential losses associated with the resolution of the acquired problem assets. Owing to paucity of information on AMC financing in China (Ma and Fun (2002)), we must estimate the structure of the AMC financing. According to government regulations, there are four principal methods of fund raising for the AMCs: equity injection by the Ministry of Finance (MoF), special loans from the People’s Bank of China (PBoC), commercial borrowing from other financial institutions and AMC bonds. The four AMCs, in theory, are wholly owned by the MoF, which provided RMB 10 billion in equity to each of the four AMCs. In total, the MoF equity injection into the four AMCs amounts to RMB40 billion, only around 3% of the entire policy transfer. However, no official published government budget document so far has explicitly confirmed such budget outlay items as MoF equity injection into the AMCs. Moreover, our research suggests that only one quarter to one third of the AMC equity might be in cash. The rest of the AMC equity could take the form of office properties, office equipments, and money-losing businesses previously owned by the matched big four bank the AMC serves. Such contributions in kind from the big four banks, directly or indirectly, may potentially complicate the AMCbank relationship. Given the tiny cash component of the small equity injection, the AMCs would have to fund the largescale NPL purchase almost entirely via the remaining three fund-raising methods. Our research confirms the absence of commercial borrowing by any of the four AMCs. In the end, the payments from the four AMCs to the big four banks for purchasing the RMB1.4 trillion NPLs were financed by PBoC loans (estimated to be RMB560 billion) and AMC bonds (RMB840 billion) issued by the AMCs to their paired or matched big four banks. The AMC bonds are non-marketable and not explicitly guaranteed by the MoF, and carry a coupon rate equal to the prevailing official one-year deposit rate (Ma and Fung (2002)). In addition, the PBoC loans to the AMCs seemed to take the form of equal reductions in the PBoC claims on the big four banks. In short, the entire policy-based NPL carve-out was funded by some 40% central bank credit and 60% by AMC bonds issued by the AMCs to their matched big four bank.

3

This AMC funding structure gives rise to several implications. First, the PBoC has been heavily involved in financing the NPL transfer operations. PBoC lending to the four AMCs amounts to more than 10 times of its own capital base. In doing so, it has directly exposed itself to AMC bonds, which are not government guaranteed. Nevertheless, in China, the prevailing view is that these AMC bonds receive implicit government support. This is the so-called constructive ambiguity. Second, the allocation of the eventual AMC loss arising from resolving the problem assets remains uncertain between the PBoC and the MoF. The Chinese central bank could be again asked to provide additional financing to the AMCs in the future. Third, without government guarantees, the AMC bonds could not achieve a zero risk weight according to the 1988 Basel Capital Accord to improve the capital base of the big four banks. Fourth, given the entire NPL transfer has been almost entirely debt-financed, the accrued interests of the four AMCs on their bonds and PBoC borrowing stand at RMB 28 to 30 billion a year at the prevailing one-year official deposit rates, which far exceed their combined annual cash recovery. Therefore, some AMCs could come under liquidity pressure if they are to honour their interest obligations in the absence of additional cash injections from the MoF or the PBoC. 1.4 NPL resolution Of the RMB1.4 trillion in distressed assets acquired by the four AMCs, through December 2002 only some RMB300 billion have been resolved (Table 1.2), after having been in operations for nearly four years.3 This figure might be open to interpretation since it includes such resolution techniques as seizure of underlying collateral, as opposed to only including actual disposition. One important reason for the relatively slow pace of NPL resolution by the four AMCs thus far might be the time-consuming debt-for-equity swaps in their first two years of operation. The four AMC have managed to recover RMB 100 billion from asset resolution, with a total recovery rate of 33% over the book value of the resolved assets (Table 2). This recovery performance is reasonable, given the challenges the four Chinese AMCs face (see below). However, actual cash recoveries were only RMB 68 billion, implying an average cash recovery rate of about 22%. The remaining RMB 33 billion are non-cash, probably in the form of physical assets at book value, which could be much larger than their underlying market values. The methods of NPL resolution mainly include debt collection, portfolio sales, auctions, joint ventures, debt-for-equity swaps and leasing out the underlying assets. Two of the four AMCs have just announced the first ever asset back securities deals in China, one with Deutsch Bank and other with a domestic securities firm, further breaking grounds for asset resolution. The Chinese AMCs face several major hurdles in their huge task of resolving the problem assets and maximising recovery. First, the absence of an efficient legal system in China that allows the owner of the debt to take action against the borrower. The adoption of a new and better bankruptcy law remains in doubt, and the AMCs would have to live with an outdated and flawed old bankruptcy law. Many of the state-owned enterprises and other borrowers can apply pressure on the legal system that forestalls or prevents decisions by the court. Related to this point is the enforcement of any legal decision or judgement that the court system may deliver. Prospective investors or buyers of AMC held assets, especially foreign investors, might discount their bid prices to compensate for the legal risk associated with collecting assets in China. The second problem is a social one. Selling a large state-owned enterprise to an investor that may eliminate non-core activities or even take the firm into bankruptcy (such as it exists) could be imposing unbearable social consequences on some cities and towns, where large portions of the local workforce may become unemployed and without health-care, pensions, access to schooling for their children, etc, given a nascent and under-funded social safety net in China. The government may wish to keep unemployment from rising too fast in the short term, as the Chinese economy is adjusting to the new WTO environments. Hence, the AMCs face obvious political and social constraints. The sheer volume of problem assets that must be resolved presents a demand and supply problem and as a consequence, realized sales could be at low values that would result in large losses to the AMC, given that assets were transferred from the big four banks to the AMCs at book value. At the same time, the internal NPL departments of the big four banks are also unloading some of their remaining distressed assets. Therefore, supply of distressed assets is likely to expand substantially in the coming years. The lack of a deep and developed capital market would further hamper asset
3

The data on resolved assets exclude the debt-for-equity swaps. While the recovery performance is reasonable, the pace is a concern, as at the current pace, it may take another 13 years for the four AMCs to resolve all the transferred assets.

4

8 10.4
Note: The cash (overall) recovery rate is computed as the ratio of cash (cash and non-cash) recovery to the face value of the resolved assets. Table 1. in contrast to the US Resolution Trust Company in the early 1990s.3 3.3
101. The real estate portion of Cinda’s portfolio is much higher compared to the general NPL portfolio.7
27.disposals.0 15.7 30. Source: PBoC.5 43. Third.5 17.7 101. in billions of RMB
Orient Book value of assets assumed Of Which: debt-for-equity swaps Equity as a percent of assets 267.3
63. which handled both performing and non-performing assets of troubled institutions. adversely affecting the pace of resolution and recovery potentials for the AMCs. let alone sell it to a third party for collection. IMF and BIS estimates.4 45. their collectability is very much in doubt. To make things worse.9 23. which tend to be more collectable.0 30.5 33. which serves as the AMC for Agriculture Bank of China. most of the assets acquired by the AMCs by now have been identified as non-performing for more than four years already.4 Huarong 407. the noticeable differences in the recovery performance across the four AMCs have been mostly shaped by the quality of the problems assets they have inherited from the big four banks.7 9.0 38. the NPLs related to real estates are only 7% of the overall asset pool held by the four AMCs.2 9.
5
5
. of which 1.6 7.
Information about the assets acquired by the AMCs available for sale or resolution is yet another hurdle.0 167. Therefore. many original debtors such as the production teams and communes have long vanished! Finally. its loans are to borrowers that are mostly small farmers spread across the entire country.9 25.3 67.5
301.7
19.5 Finally.8 12. such loans should have been classified as non-performing (See Ma and Fung (2002)). This may explain in part why Cinda has managed a higher cash recovery so far.3 19.8 7.3 24. More generally.7
86.4 21. First.6 11. the bank does not have books and records of each borrower that enable the AMC to effectively collect the loan.2 China: resolution progress and recovery performance Cumulative as of December 2002.0 Total 1390.4 million are natural persons. the general asset quality of the portfolio acquired by the four AMCs also points to a less optimistic outlook on recovery. The NPL portfolios of the four Chinese AMCs differ a great deal in terms of their quality and characteristics. In the case of China Great Wall Asset Management Corporation (Great Wall).4 Second.1
Book value of disposed assets As % of total acquired assets
45. In many cases.4 40.9 321.8 15. by international loan classification norms. However. most of their NPL portfolios are not secured. reaching 16%.8 33. most of the loans taken over by the AMCs are truly nonperforming.8 23. even according to the very loose definitions of the old Chinese loan classification system.6 26.6 22.6
Actual recoveries Of which: cash Of which: non-cash Overall recovery rate (in percent) Cash recovery rate (in percent)
20.2 31.0
106.9 9.1 18.6 Cinda 370.3
33. and those with corporate guarantees sometimes mean very little in terms of
4
There might be some “performing loans” related to the debt-for-equity swaps.8 45.0 Great Wall 345. after the dismantling of the commune system and establishment of the family farming system during the 1980s. Great Wall has some RMB345 billion in loans to nearly 2 million debtors. Both supply and demand factors thus tend to put pressure on the market prices of the distressed assets.

Certain government policies have been supportive to AMC recovery efforts. which sometimes differs from one agency to the other.1). audited or otherwise. First.effective collection. the reported 22% cash recovery rate so far by the Chinese AMCs should be regarded as a hard-won achievement. Unfortunately. we are seeing some signs of strengthened momentum with regard to asset resolution. corporate governance.6 The sale of assets by Huarong through international auctions is significant for several reasons. there is a renewed effort on the part of the Chinese government to provide more updated and consistent information on the progress of asset resolution. it represents a significant realisation of cash by an AMC when resolving distressed assets. there is room for greater transparency regarding the AMC-bank relationship. Great Wall and Orient Asset Management Corporations are currently closing their own deals of international bundled loan sales. In short. the private arm of the World Bank Group. notwithstanding the controversy over the actual recovery performance of the auction. and in part because of the aforementioned weak legal environment. offering an unusual link between the AMCs and the big four banks. averaging around 3. none of the four AMCs has formally published its detailed balance sheet or income statement. For example. the PBoC has played the role of not only an important financier to the AMCs but also a key supervisor. In Morgan Stanley's case. they may potentially receive a USD30 million loan from the IFC to finance their acquisition of the loans from Huarong. though internal supervisory committees have been established within all the AMCs. There appears to be no systematic external auditing for the four AMCs. officially injected by the MoF but actually provided by the banks. whose role is being taken over by the CBRC. Moreover. the general success of Huarong's auction has captured the interest of several other AMCs. evidencing their interest in China. A better defined relationship between the four AMCs and their matched big four banks could also help enhance the efficiency of the AMC resolution operations. PBoC. However. So far. For instance. despite the problems mentioned above. mostly notably the MoF. This in turn could hamper the coordination among different government agencies.
6
. in part because those companies providing guarantees are not in good financial shape themselves. the initial executive order issued by the State Council regarding the AMCs was not quite clear on the division of duties among the aforementioned institutions. has agreed to provide financing to the qualified bidder(s) who prevailed in the auction. In sum. which took over the bank supervisory and regulatory functions from the PBoC. come from the big four banks that produced the problem assets to begin with. On the other hand. public disclosure. Recently. China Huarong Asset Management Corporation (Huarong) has recently completed the first two international auctions of distressed assets in China. real estate tax. business tax. The AMCs have to report their operations to the MoF and the PBoC on a monthly basis. all AMCs seem to be quite transparent regarding their resolution operations such as information regarding public auctions. the Chinese AMCs enjoy certain tax advantages in their disposition operations. Lately. staff quality and other norms are sometimes not ideal.000 for each AMC. Second. And the PBoC conducts regular onsite inspections of the AMCs. the president of each big four bank is also the party secretary of the designated AMC in every instance. The International Finance Corporation (IFC). stamp duties and land registration fee. as they are exempted from value-added tax. Some AMCs and their matched big four banks are still debating over how to evaluate parts of the AMC equity. the four AMCs will be supervised directly by the newly set up China Bank Regulatory Commission (CBRC). Although government regulations stipulate that the State Council directly appoints the presidents and vice presidents of the four AMCs. which is much needed to compensate for an already weak legal environment. And their published statistics seem to be less than clearly defined. most of the AMC staff. From April 2003 onward. the auction was won by international investors. most government regulations pertaining to the AMCs are vague and require interpretation. As a consequence.5 Supervisory environments and corporate governance Oversight and supervision of the four AMCs have been carried out by a number of governmental agencies. And the government has been offering incentives of cash bonus to AMCs for their cash recovery from resolving their acquired NPLs.
6
A consortium led by Morgan Stanley was the successful bidder for a pool of RMB10 billion in loans. 1. A second pool of RMB 2 billion in loans was won by Goldman Sachs. In fact. and China Securities Regulatory Commission (Graph 1. Therefore. despite all these daunting challenges and headwinds.

Some IDR144. except joint banks and foreign bank offices. Therefore. the government issued a huge amount of bonds (IDR650 trillion) to support banks. down from 237 in mid-1997. banks’ operating revenues have relied heavily on interest income from bonds. As such.5 trillion of bonds were used in the form of liquidity assistance by the central bank (“BLBI”) to provide emergency loans to banks that suffered liquidity problem during the height of the Asian crisis.9
7
The blanket guarantee was for both banks’ liabilities and deposits. Over five years have passed. verifies eligibility. In order to prevent the banking system from collapsing. The Banking Law specifies three main duties of IBRA: to restructure banks transferred to IBRA. It seems almost certain that IBRA will not be able to complete its tasks. The collapse of the rupiah exchange rate and the sharp rise in interest rates caused nearly the entire corporate sector to default. While bank lending has picked up gradually. the legal basis for IBRA operational activities became more solid. after the government decided to provide a blanket guarantee or full protection for depositors and creditors in response to the banking crisis. This is particularly difficult in verifying domestic interbank liabilities. All cash recovered from IBRA’s operations. including all the state-owned banks. With the implementation of the Law No. Official gross NPL ratio (without allowing for reserves for write-offs) dropped to 8. it is still well below its pre-crisis level. Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency (IBRA)
2. Recently.2. over 40% were government bonds. The answer provided by IBRA was that nobody knew the extent of the problem at the time and that IBRA’s presence was a constant reminder of the country in crisis.8 trillion was used for the guarantee program. and settles verified claims. As a result. 10 of 1998 (Banking Law). IBRA is expected to operate for only five years until February 2004.8 The remaining amount of IDR73. the sooner it ceases existence the better. many of the banks that received BLBI failed afterwards and the government disputed how much of the losses to be borne.
8
9
8
. While just over one-third of the assets were bank credits. the government has announced a resolution of the issue by issuing perpetual promissory notes to the central bank to cover its losses. which also provided the funding for IBRA. 27 dated 26 January 1998. with the four stateowned banks taking a share of 48. a large number of banks experienced liquidity shortage and insolvency. these banks were taken over by the government.1 Background Following the outbreak of the Asian financial crisis in mid-1997. All of the assets of the closed or frozen banks were subsequently transferred to IBRA. A large portion of the bonds (IDR431 trillion) was issued to recapitalise banks (“recap bonds”) that had their capital being wiped out.5%. 2. Subsequently. The recap banks were required to transfer all bad loan assets (category-5) to IBRA.
Structure
IBRA is an autonomous agency of the Ministry of Finance. except those belonged to shareholders and holders of subordinated debts. The question is then why a lifetime of only five years given the scope of the problem. Total bank assets have risen steadily since 1998 to 1112 trillion (69% of GDP) in 2002. Some controlling shareholders were not able to contribute their share of the capital required for recap and as a result. suggesting only slow recovery in bank intermediation. GDP shrank 14%. many of them were closed or taken over by the government. to recover bank assets. IBRA is to administer the Government’s Guarantee Program until a new deposit agency is established. compared to over 50% at the peak of the banking crisis. Other banks that were ineligible for the recap program and were not viable were closed or frozen. This put the Bank Indonesia at risk of bankruptcy. after the deduction for its expenses. is transferred to reduce the state budget deficit. To administer the blanket guarantee program. Indonesia experienced its worst economic crisis in recent history. As of end 2002.2 Key features of IBRA Establishment IBRA was established based on the Decree of the President of the Republic of Indonesia No. However. inflation spiked to 45% and interest rates shot up to nearly 70%. and to recover state funds formerly disbursed to the banking sector.1%. but the economy is still struggling to recover from the crisis. IBRA registers claims.7 IBRA was set up to administer the blanket guarantee and to restructure the banking sector. In 1998. there were 141 commercial banks in Indonesia.

was set up to enhance the standard of financial reporting by IBRA and to ensure standards of corporate governance and control. IBRA employs nearly 2000 people and about half of them are from commercial banks of which 30% are from closed banks. Other members include the secretary of FSPC.1 shows the governance structure of IBRA.
10
FSPC is a state body chaired by the Coordinating Minister of Economy to decide and coordinate government policies on the financial system. shareholder settlements and asset disposals. The OC meets at least once a week to make recommendations on issues related to transparency. Both the Minister of State-Owned Enterprises (previously the Minister of Finance) and the Financial Sector Policy Committee (FSPC)10. former minister of finance under President Soeharto. Regulatory environment in which the AMC operates
Figure 2. including an annual report since 1999. IBRA has improved its transparency by publishing various reports related to its financial position and operations. Minister of Trade and Industry. Internal audit was formed in late 1998 to ensure the transparency and accountability of IBRA as a public institution. It has nine members. chaired by Ma’rie Muhammad. As of April 2003. he held various senior government positions before joining IBRA. The Oversight Committee (OC). Other senior officials tended to come from the government. State Minister of National Planning Development and the State Minister of State Owned Enterprise. are responsible to oversee IBRA. and representatives from the private sector and academics. Like most of his predecessors. there are now 7 deputy chairmen in charge of IBRA’s various major responsibilities. was appointed in April 2002. Mr Syafruddin Tumenggung. especially commercial banks. It has five members who are independent professionals. Asset management investment (AMI) – to manage and dispose of industrial and real estate assets transferred to IBRA from bank shareholders in settlement of outstanding liabilities. The Audit Committee. a standing committee of the OC. chairman of IBRA. IBRA employed independent public accountants to audit its financial statements. IBRA offers a fixed salary and benefits that are above market. These recommendations are not binding and are not always adopted by IBRA or the responsible Minister.1 IBRA's governance structure
President
State Minister for SOE Affairs
FSPC
Minister of Finance
IBRA
IBRA Oversight Committee
Command Line Coordination Line Recommendation
Ombudsman Committee
Audit Committee
Figure 2. external auditor. set up by and reports to the FSPC.
9
. The tasks of the three main units of IBRA are as follows: • • • Asset management credit (AMC) – to restructure and dispose of loans and other (non-core) assets transferred to IBRA from closed (frozen) and recapitalised banks. Besides the chairman and vice chairman. The current chairman. state-owned enterprises or from the private sector.IBRA is organised in a way that reflects its major tasks.
Bank restructuring unit (BRU) – to restructure the banking system and to dispose of the equity stakes in banks managed by IBRA. It has published a monthly report since April 2000 that provides information on asset sales and other operations. monitors the overall performance of IBRA and provides independent review of IBRA restructuring. Its members include the Minister of Finance.

as a result of the government guarantee program and the subsequent recapitalisation of banks.037 159.216 Principal 144.0 644. In its 2000 Annual Report. SME/Retail (loan amount < IDR 5 bn).599 11.373 374.00 # Acct 45.7 167.288 310.2 Loan classification by category/size as of 16 April 2003
Category # Acct Corporate Commercial SME/ Retail Total 55.4 117.62 100.871 391. The book value of IBRA’s assets is very large at IDR506 trillion or 34% of GDP as of end 2001 (Table 2.867 % 83.7 Expected recovery rate (%) 22 21 45 26 2001 Face value 283.390 29.564 1.2.3 26.214 Assets transferred to IBRA Debtors 2.000/USD and loan principal only.8 Fair value 88.11
Table 2.1).8 505.350 12. These assets are categorised as: • • • • Core assets – non-performing loans transferred from banks taken over and state banks as well as all loans taken over from closed or frozen banks. Non-core assets – buildings and other properties such as cars and office equipments acquired in the process of liquidating closed banks.887 2. which are managed by the AMI.737 291. which are also managed by the AMC. which are managed by the AMC.65 100.532 8.317 296.3 Asset acquisition IBRA acquired a wide range of assets from closed (BBO/BBKU) and taken over banks (BTO).707 59.650 Outstanding Debtors 905 961 10.52 7. Equity holdings – equity stakes in banks recapitalised by IBRA.064 % 90.7
Source: IBRA 2000 and 2001 Annual Reports
These assets were transferred to IBRA at zero value but the government in effect paid the face value for them by providing a full guarantee to depositors and creditors and recapitalising the banks.941 Principal 328.1 IBRA asset holdings as of end 2000 and 2001 In IDR trillion
2000 Assets AMC: Loans AMI: Settlement assets BRU: Equity holdings in banks Total Face value 401.53 0. IBRA estimated the fair value of these assets to be 26% of the face value. Commercial (5 < loan amount < IDR 50 bn).6 52. Table 2.606 33.8 120.82 8.86 8.1 101.344 2. Shareholder assets – assets pledged by former bank shareholders in settlement of claims related to their violation of prudential norms. SME/Retail (loan amount > IDR 50 bn) Source: IBRA 2001 Annual Report
11
Fair value reported by IBRA is defined as the value of the assets that would be realised in the market according to appraisal data and/or the latest sales data available to IBRA. managed by the BRU.463 13.
10
.00
Note: Exchange rate IDR7.2 126.

4 Asset resolution Rapid asset disposal is key to the success of IBRA in recovering state funds. which started in year 2000.As of 16 April 2003. Many of the loans were poorly administered and often had inadequate collateral. IBRA began asset disposal only in mid-1999.13 The program. However. IBRA has carried out five batches of corporate loan sale through open auction. For these loans.941 debtors was transferred to IBRA. The total proceeds of the asset disposal programs were IDR41 trillion. This was followed by the crash programs. has shown some encouraging results. around 9% are commercial loans (principal between IDR5 and IDR50 billion) and the remaining 7% are SME/retail loans (principal < IDR5 billion). About half of the loans are denominated in foreign currency. it is also engaged in loan restructuring of the largest debtors. implemented from mid-2000 to mid-2002.2).4 billion in cash and IDR4. the outsourcing program was later included in the Loan Asset Disposal Program. which make up of approximately only 4% of the total assets managed by AMC. Outsourcing for commercial loans – Loan outsourcing program is a program to sell commercial loans through a selected third party (servicing agent).8 trillion worth of loans for 363. Despite being set up in January 1998. BNI consortium.7 billion in bonds. that offered flexibility for the debtor to settle their debts by providing a 100% discount on interest and penalty as well as 25% discount on principal for productive loans only. raising some doubts that these assets might eventually find their ways back to the original owners. • Corporate loan sale – So far. IBRA received from this sale IDR17. in order to expedite the disposal process. achieving a recovery rate of 27%. suggesting a respectable recovery rate of 30% (Table 3). In any event. There were delays in the process of transferring the loans to IBRA from closed and frozen banks owing to documentation problems.
11
. the vast majority of these loans are category-5. The largest sale so far was through its Loan Asset Sales Program (PPAK) in 2002. Over 200 investors (50% local and 50% overseas) bid for 82% of the loan principal and IBRA succeeded in selling IDR82 trillion of the loans. This consisted mainly of bad debts (category-5) that originated from 11 recap banks and 7 state banks (account for 50% of the loan assets) as well as assets from the frozen or closed banks. Nearly two-thirds of the loans were unrestructured corporate loans and the rest comprised of both restructured corporate and commercial loans.856 accounts or 93% of the total principal amount. In terms of number of accounts and debtors. which have been difficult to sell. Bank Bukopin and Bank Artha Graha. retail loans account for the bulk of the loan assets. In terms of outstanding balance (see Table 2. the sales of financial assets and the securitisation of assets. IBRA has four means of assets disposal. the public offering of shares and loans. At the same time. From 1999 to 2002. As of 31 December 2002. IBRA was able to settle IDR 25. mainly US dollar.
•
•
12 13
Thus the value of loan assets sometimes varies depending on the exchange rate used. involving IDR135 trillion of loan principal ATK value from 2583 debtors. Nearly 70% of the successful bids were from local investors. namely through the private placement of corporate assets. almost 84% are corporate loans (principal > IDR50 billion).12 2. IBRA disposed of IDR135 trillion of loans through loan auctions. a total of IDR392 trillion of bank loan assets belonging to 296. Small and medium enterprise (SME) and retail loans – IBRA also has a large number of debtors with insignificant amount of loans (face value below IDR 5 billion). These agents included Bank Danamon. IBRA chose to sell the loans through open tender auction.
AMC
IBRA has focused on the disposition of loan assets using different methods depending on the size of the loan. returning assets to the real sector and privatising banks under its management. but the recovery rate was declining. In addition.

with over 80% of the loans near the late stage of restructuring. namely the largest 21 debtors.9% 27.7% 40.695. • Asset to bond swap program .64 1.8% 28.287.IBRA also sold IDR9. less than 40% of the loans to the 51 largest debtors and beyond have the restructuring in late stage or completed.978. In contrast. CULS = Corporate unrestructured loan sales.4% 20. Table 4 reports that almost 98% of the loans to the top 21 obligor groups are at the late stage of restructuring or have completed restructuring.10 41. commercial and retail loans (CULS) in 2002. As of June 2002.828.31 135.9% 32.3% 38.885.93 554.05 986.96 220.00 1.024.44 Proceed 39.133.15 8.60%
2001
Auction 2002
Total
Note: * Face Value
ATK = Asset Transfer Kit.075.00 2. Since then.1% 22.003. This CDO represents the first transaction of this type in Indonesia using the domestic market.17 4. in IDR billion
Disposal Method Year 1999 2000 Program Credit Card Disposal CLS I CLS II ADP (SME Disposal) Total 2000 CCAS III CCAS IV Batch I CCAS IV Batch II Direct Selling Total 2001 CCAS IV Batch III CCAS V CULS Direct Selling PPAK* PPAK-PPL* P3AK* Total 2002 ATK 76.
•
•
Collateralised debt obligation (CDO) – IBRA planned to securitise a diversified portfolio of restructured loans and loans in the MOU stage with a face value of IDR50 trillion in late 2002.80 7.3% 26.8% 96.4% 25. Unrestructured loans .Table 2. PPAK – Loan asset sales program Source: IBRA
In addition.0% 70.0% 17.81 3.787.09 3.45 75. In contrast to loan sale.0% 30.57 2.44 3.5 trillion of unrestructured corporate.834.375.57 (%) Recovery Rate 51. Given IBRA’s limited resource and time.182.00 15.85 21. the progress from the late stage to completion is limited.900.49 2.387.317.3% 25.84 2. by carrying out restructuring itself.7% 33.393.141.8% 47.079.Eligible investors can use government recap bonds as payment for IBRA’s assets.00 3.290. IBRA does not perform well in loan restructuring.738.179.41 1. however.69 29.28 1.40 2.54 310.011.59 19.659. several new asset disposal programs have been introduced to speed up the loan sale process.96 891.29 2. This program could speed up the redemption of outstanding recap bonds and also enable banks to use the recap bonds to increase their holdings of other income-generating assets. CCAS = Corporate core asset sales.3% 60.00 621.3 Asset disposal programs 1999 to 2002.40 2.4% 71.00 5. fully repaid or disposed). Progress in loan restructuring of the top 21 obligors got a big boost in 2000. it has focused on the larger deals.401.000.89 670. CLS = Corporate loan sales.33 727.494.517.
12
.17 9.65 107. IBRA has successfully restructured around 17% of the loans (restructuring proposal implemented.

In some cases.2 3.4 11. a U. IBRA collected IDR 17.5 200 353
Note: Early stage includes restructuring not initiated. full payment or disposal. non-resident debtors. due diligence. buildings. investment
13
.96
% 1. it is expected that these shareholders will be able to settle their liabilities in cash.6 Late stage 75.7 trillion out of IDR 35. a 51% stake of BCA was finally sold to Farallon Capital. After much delay.5 53. resulting in assets that were not transferred or transferred at less than the agreed amount.6 3. These have led to a significant deterioration in the value of some of these assets.7 25.4 Status of IBRA loan restructuring based on grouping of obligors As of June 2002. Completed includes loans that are in stage of implementation. For debtor whose restructuring process is not completed as required.73 13. in %
Obligor group Top 21 Next 22-50 Remainder (51 onward) Total debtors Early stage 0. all restructuring agreements are required to be completed in 6 months. Table 5 below describes the loan restructuring progress for loans above IDR 750 billion. Late stage includes finalisation of a workout MOU or legal action in progress.3 trillion as a result of the successful divestment of its equity holdings in several banks. The main impediments to recovering as much values from these assets include the slow recovery of the Indonesian economy as well as IBRA’s lack of managerial control and the legal authority to initiate changes in these companies. By the end of 2002. interbank claims.5 4. The shareholder liabilities settlement program (“PKPS”) constitutes the framework by which the recovery of the state fund that had been disbursed to banks under care of IBRA is maximized.7 trillion of the acquisition value of assets pledged by the shareholders or 49. by assigning accountability for the losses incurred by these banks to their respective shareholders.9 16.2 Completed 19.5 Loan restructuring progress As of 17 March 2003 Restructuring Process Initial Stage Under Restructuring Restructuring Completed Total
Source: IBRA
Number of Debtor 10 13 45 68
Principal (IDR trillion) 0. estate etc) or signing a debt memorandum equal to the amount of their liabilities. IBRA failed to enforce shareholders’ compliance. they have the option of settling by way of pledging their corporate assets (equity.S. Through this program.4 45.30 24. This program represents an out-ofcourt settlement.95 73. IBRA is still conducting loan restructuring only for loans with principal amount above IDR 750 billion. BRU has already over achieved its 2002 target of collecting IDR4. or restructuring negotiations. Figures exclude identified shareholder settlement. Table 2.Table 2.00
AMI
The main task of AMI is to maintain the shareholders liabilities settlement.96 41.7% recovery rate.3 10. the loan will be transferred to the disposal program.KKSK/05/2002 dated 13 May 2002.6 63. However. 01/K. Otherwise. and derivatives & marketable securities.2 Middle stage 4.9 22. or standstill agreement. initial negotiation.4 15. retail loans.26 55.74 100. Kep.4 13. Middles stage includes assignment of advisors. which can be expected to yield better and more optimal result than if the matters were pursued in court. including the Bank Credit Asia (BCA).
BRU
By mid-2002.8 Total (IDR trillion) 99. Source: IBRA and authors’ calculation
With the issuance of the FSPC decree No.

8 27. is an important issue.0 10 Realised 14. add a serious burden to the state budget. the asset recovery rate may decline due to: (1) very poor quality of the transferred assets (category-5 loans) (2) overvaluation of pledged shareholder assets (3) the weak economy and the depressed property sector (4) depreciation of assets transferred to IBRA in part owing to poor management by IBRA. except in the case when a IBRA bank is short of capital.2 9. estimated to be IDR60 trillion for 2002.5 18 8 3 2. While BI does not supervise IBRA. For fiscal 2003.firm.9 (17%) (36%) Target 15.5 7. which has a deficit of over IDR40 trillion or 2. who owns most of the banks.6 IBRA revenue targets for 2001-2003 In IDR trillion
2001 AMC AMI BRU Others Total cash Bonds Total cash and bonds Proceeds to government Cash Bonds Target 14.5 5. From this transaction. it will be given more time to raise
14
.5 27. the bank supervisor. However. The interest payments for the recap bonds.6 trillion. IBRA had collected IDR3 trillion in cash and IDR2.7 35.8 trillion in cash and bonds to the government and contributed IDR112.9 35.9 trillion in bonds. the two institutions work closely together and meet regularly to discuss bank restructuring.3 1. IBRA’s target is to collect IDR18 trillion in cash and IDR8 trillion in bonds. BI claims that it supervises IBRA banks the same way as other banks. On the one hand. Since its establishment in 1998 up to the end of the first quarter of 2003.3 7.1 0. So far.6 43.5 10.4 (5%)
Source: IBRA 2000 and 2001 Annual Reports and IBRA Monthly Reports January and April 2003
The government sets the annual revenue target for IBRA and decides the distribution between cash (to reduce the budget deficit) and bonds (to reduce the bonds outstanding).6 0. of Malaysia in September 2002 for USD110 million.6 6.8 29. Table 2.5 2002 Target 32. In May 2003.8 0.0 20. 2.7 28. IBRA’s 2002 Operation Report calculated the recovery rate of asset disposal to be 34%. the need to maximise the recovery of funds to reduce budget deficit leads to IBRA‘s pragmatic approach towards asset disposal and helps to clear political hurdles in expediting the sale of assets.0 (0%) 0. it remains somewhat ambiguous as to who actually is supervising banks owned by IBRA.5 Summary and other issues IBRA reflects the cost of the crisis in Indonesia or the cost to salvage the nation’s banking system.9 39. Parliament has been trying to prevent previous owners of recap banks from buying back assets they pledged to the government until they have repaid their dues. On the other hand.6 6.9 3. However. But parliament finally approved the sale of BCA and other banks. Parliament has been unwilling to see important assets sold to foreign investors and suspicious of the deep discounts needed to entice investors. IBRA finalised the sale of 51% of Bank Danamon to the consortium of Asia Financial Indonesia (Temasek Holding and Deutsche Bank AG). IBRA also sold 51% of Bank Niaga to Commercial Assets Holding Bhd.7 (5%) 0.6 48. in March 2002 for approximately IDR5.3 7. The relationship between BI.7 trillion to the state budget.1 (458%) 1.1 trillion.7 43. IBRA has been able to meet most of the annual targets.5 (8%) 0. IBRA had recovered a total amount of IDR140. IBRA expects to receive about IDR3. going forward.7 10. In the first quarter of 2003.7 2. and IBRA.5 Realised 26.6 10. achieving 23% of its fiscal target. IBRA can keep some of the bonds acquired (recycle bonds) for its operations such as further bank recap.0 26 2003 Realised (1Q 03) 0. which is close to the experience of other East Asian AMCs and higher than the 26% recovery rate estimated by IBRA in its 2000 Annual Report.0 39.9 2. the pressure to reduce the budget deficits raises concerns that these assets will go back to the hands of their original owners.5% of GDP.7 39.4 4 0.

merging banks. FSPC. Private observers argued that even when BI finds problems with IBRA banks.g. The lack of independence. Parliament. a manager/supervisor of almost 80% of the banking system. they argued that IBRA failed to monitor the banks under their control as an owner. Worse still. This is evident by the fact that there have been seven chairmen in less than four years and a very high turnover of senior staff.the minister overseeing IBRA. The broad mandate of IBRA that gave it a wide range of responsibilities is also a concern.capital above the 8% level if IBRA is considering to merge the bank. and a restructuring agent of the banking system through. In relation to its many tasks. especially from the political process. OC. has been one major constraint to IBRA’s operations. it does not have a very clear vision of its role.
15
. IBRA is also subject to the influence of many parties . IBRA is an asset management company. e. It is also a major source of revenue to reduce the state budget deficits. it is not sure who is responsible for fixing them. an agent to carry out recapitalisation. The delay in the sale of government equity stakes in banks also suggests political disagreement on how to divest the bank investment. an agent for the blanket guarantee. thus often appears to be reporting to different bodies for different purposes. or even the donor organisations. As such.

3. For example. the president of Mizoho Holdings. the NPL ratio tripled from 2.4% from 6. wholesale and retail .6% in 1992 to 8% in September 2002. The extent of the problems in the banking system is also reflected in the increase in the NPL ratio during the 10-year period from FY1992 to 2002 (Table 3. A “needs attention borrower” already has problems with lending conditions. time deposits are now covered up to a maximum principal of JPY 10 million plus interest only. Mr Maeda.
15 16
16
.1).14 While the overall capital adequacy ratio (non-consolidated) according to the financial reports of the major banks and the results of the special inspections still stood well above 10%. Japan’s Resolution and Collection Corporation (RCC)
3. the NPL ratio rose almost four times from 2. two recent developments may further impact the banking system. the Japanese authorities are in the process of lifting the blanket guarantee for most of the deposits (see 3. However. a reduction of JPY3. The FSA requires banks to dispose of 50% of loans newly classified as “ in danger of bankruptcy” or below within one year and roughly 80% within two years. a marked slowdown from 4% in the 1980s. could lead to a decline in banks’ capital adequacy ratios to below the 8% regulatory minimum. With equity prices remain depressed. The last and the highest risk category is “bankrupt”. The average trend growth rate is just one percent a year in the 1990s. Looking forward.2% a year earlier The increase in the NPL ratio is attributable to a worsening of global and domestic economic conditions and a stricter application of the criteria for classification of loans used in the special inspections. account for almost 50% of total loans in Japan. Expressed in terms of total loans. A “de facto bankrupt” borrower is not yet legally bankrupt but is having serious loan repayment problems.1 trillion. First. in total. such as current accounts.that accounted for about 75% of the NPLs in these banks as of end March 2002. Nikkei tumbled by nearly 80% from its 1989 peak to 8363 at the end of February 2003. A “normal borrower” is one that shows no weaknesses. will continue to be fully covered even after 2005. raising concerns of a deflation spiral.5% to 9.2). The announcement “Measures for Developing Stronger Financial System” was made on 12 April 2002. which. the latest figure for NPLs as of end-September 2002 is JPY40.15 In addition. which has dominated the domestic financial system with total assets of about 150% of Japan’s GDP. Japanese banks have seen their profits dropped sharply and their balance sheets deteriorated as a result of a rising number of NPLs. More specifically. growth has not picked up and deflation has shown no sign of abating. said that the bank’s capital ratio could go under 8% if Nikkei fell below 7200. any loan that is currently of lower risk but deteriorates such that it subsequently falls into these two highest risk categories must be removed from the bank’s balance sheet within three years. At the same time. reflecting the borrowers’ business conditions and market signals against them. According to the Asian Wall Street Journal on 22 January 2003. This has raised doubts about the proper functioning and viability of the banking system. the inspections focussed on an appropriate classification of borrowers as well as sufficient level of write-offs and provisioning on a timely basis. banks were required to use new mark-tomarket accounting standards on their equity holdings. beginning in fiscal year April 2001.1 trillion. The aim of the inspections was to assess the credit quality and to ensure an appropriate classification of loans to large borrowers in four industries . While the Bank of Japan (BOJ) cut interest rates from 6% in mid1991 to zero in 1999. Worse still.construction. the resulting deduction of paper losses from retained earnings. meaning that a borrower is legally and formally bankrupt. Only deposits used for payments and settlements. Second. growth in the Japanese economy slowed substantially.3% and in terms of GDP. the overall NPL ratio increased to 8. this class is further subdivided in “special attention” and “other borrowers”. consumer prices have been falling since late 1990s.1 Overview After the burst of the asset price bubbles in the early 1990s. real estate. Ordinary and specified deposits will remain protected in full until 31 March 2005. the Financial Supervisory Authority of Japan (FSA) performed in 2001 special inspections of 13 major banks to obtain a more current assessment of the level of credit risk in these institutions.16
14
The classification scheme for borrowers provided by the FSA is as follows. The next higher risk category is “in danger of bankruptcy” in which a borrower is facing real business difficulties. In practice. Partly in response to these concerns.

8% 2. Long-term credit banks and Trust Banks.6) (25.8% 9. In October 1998 the law concerning emergency measures for the reconstruction of the functions of the financial system.3% 8.8 2.1 Non-performing loans (NPLs) and GDP in Japan fiscal year-end value.8% 5.8% 3.3) (19. the Resolution and Collection Corporation (RCC) was created and incorporated. which has a banking license but is not currently involved in any
17 18
The amendment of the Deposit Insurance Law came into force in June 1996 to improve the safety net of the financial system. the Japanese authorities have introduced various measures. For 1995-96.1)
2
C 482 488 492 452.9% 3.3% 5.7 511 509 513 512 514 503 493 475 454 432
D 739.2 40. For 1992-94.6 30. the DICJ has expanded both in size and importance.5% 9.0%
A/C 2.1
2
504 517 521 514 511 515 503 501
“All banks” refer to all domestically licensed banks. City Banks.7% 3.9) (16.4) (22.7 1.6% 8. in trillions of JPY
NPLs all banks1 GDP Total bank loans Total bank assets NPL / GDP % NPL / total loans % NPL / total assets % A/D 1. to respond to the bursting of the bubble economy and the increasing number of failures of financial institutions.4 739 736 750 754 788 779 768 759 759 732 2.8% 4.
2
The NPL number for all banks is as of September 2002
Source: Financial Services Agency. “Financial Function Reconstruction Law” or “Financial Function Revitalisation Law” was legislated.7% 2. figures are composed of LBB and PDL.7 2.5% 5. Bank of Japan
3. The Deposit Insurance Corporation of Japan (DICJ) which was established in 1971. they introduced a blanket guarantee for deposits and other claims.7% 4. These two laws affected the DICJ in two key manners: first.2 Deposit Insurance Corporation of Japan (DICJ) During the 1990s.5%
A 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
1
B – – – (21.6% 4. Long-term credit banks. Table 3.4 32. In 1998 the Financial Revitalization Law18 and the Financial Function Early Strengthening Law19 were enacted to address the increasing distress of the financial sector.3%
12.9% 6.0% 4. The RCC.8) (19.5% 5.2% 5.8% 2. Regional Banks and Regional Banks II.3.8 29. Figures in parentheses refer to the amounts of City banks.8% 1. figures are composed of loans to borrowers in legal bankruptcy (LBB). with more than half of the staff seconded from the government.7% 5. The Financial Function Early Strengthening Law complements the Financial Function Reconstruction Law as a means for providing financial assistance.3) (27.8 13.2% 6.5 21. including the revision of the Deposit Insurance Law. Trust Banks.5 43.0) (20.9% 6. The number of staff has increased from only 15 in 1995 to over 400 in 2002.3 The RCC The RCC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DICJ that was established on 1 April 1999 to deal with the growing NPLs in Japan.3% 5. was given a new start in August 1996 after the revisions of the Deposit Insurance Law17 in 1996 and then in 1997. As a result.8 29. and second.
19
17
. Past due loans (PDL) and restructured loans.6 12.7% 5.5 28.8% 5.

The RCC’s core business activities include: (1) the recovery of loans transferred from former Jusen companies. was a former head of the Japan Bar Association and a bankruptcy trustee. First. In addition. These non-bank financial institutions were founded in the 1970s to complement the bank’s housing loans. the RCC is now involved in deciding the fate of insolvent corporate borrowers and the revitalisation of struggling firms. the RCC has dealt with 105 companies and is currently reviewing another 173 cases. Over time. It employs some 2500 staff in the head office. but rather to serve as a catalyst for a domestic NPL market.
21
22 23
18
. assets assigned to the former HLAC from seven housing loan companies under the Jusen Law. On 11 January in 2002. assets classified in principle in the doubtful category and below purchased from sound financial institutions under Article 53 of the Financial Revitalization Law. the RCC was allowed to purchase shares in banks under the Early Strengthening Law. However.
20
The HLAC was created in the early 1990s based on ‘The Jusen Law’ to acquire assets from the failed “Jusen” (housing loan corporations). Mr A. was the outgrowth of a merger between Housing Loan Administration Corporation (HLAC)20 and Resolution and Collection Bank (RCB)21.994 billion. The RCC’s main objective is the quick and efficient collection of NPLs using fair and transparent means while at the same time minimizing the use of public funds. No sunset date has been set for the RCC. and (4) the pursuit of civil and criminal liabilities of former executives and debtors of failed financial institutions.656 billion. assets purchased from failed financial institutions including banks. the RCC established a new revitalisation division of 62 experienced staff members. failed financial institutions. In August 2001. In its operation up to February 2003. which compares to JPY 3. following amendments to both laws to strengthen the financial system and the Jusen Law22. purchased at a price of JPY 4. under the former RCB. (3) subscribing to bank-issued shares in an attempt to enhance the capital adequacy of financial institutions. as well as other loans purchased in line with Article 53 of the Financial Revitalization Law. The RCC has moved from a pure NPL collection centre to include a broader corporate restructuring role. The current president of the RCC. the governing body was the Financial Reconstruction Commission.4 NPL acquisition and purchase by the RCC The RCC has acquired and managed three types of assets. RCC’s purchase of Article 53 NPLs must be approved by the FSA23. RCB gained later a wider role for assuming failed credit cooperatives and could also buy NPLs from failed financial institutions.048 billion. the RCC is in agreement with the Agricultural & Fishery Cooperative Savings Insurance Corporation to become the collector of NPLs from their associated institutions. RCC’s position has been strengthened. however. The RCC has since its inception managed the transferred NPLs from seven former Jusen companies. Until the merger of the FRC into the FSA in January 2001. emphasising the need for having an efficient secondary loan market. the RCC received approval for trust business. Finally. As of yearend 2002. In June 2001. does not mean that the RCC is expected to dispose of most of the NPLs. 3. Kioi. Since April 2001. which is now obsolete. The DICJ provided the RCC’s initial capital of 212 billion by mainly issuing government-guaranteed bonds.lending. At the same time. The principal amount for these assets amounted to JPY 21. Law Concerning Special Measures for Promotion of Disposal of Claims and Debts of Specific Jusen Companies. including participating in loan auctions. In December 1994 the Bank of Japan and private banks established the Tokyo Kyoudou Bank to assume business from two failed institutions. the Japanese government began to stress the need for a faster resolution and disposition of NPLs as a key element in strengthening the financial system. the assets were purchased on average at a low purchase price of only JPY 261 billion. Second.437 billion and the purchase price was JPY 4. (2) the purchase and collection of NPLs from failed as well as sound financial institutions. To carry out these functions.748 billion. The total amount purchased as of September 2002 was JPY 1. This. RCC also was allowed to increase its purchases of NPLs from banks and to bid at market price for loans. 27 branches and 16 offices.392 billion at the end of fiscal year 2002 reflecting a dramatic increase. the RCC was given another three years to purchase NPLs from viable financial institutions under the amendment of the Financial Function Reconstruction Law. classified in the doubtful category and below. such assets amounted to JPY 10. For example. which in turn was reorganised in June 1996 into the RCB.

Overall. the RCC is allowed to purchase assets from sound financial institutions managed in the Financial Reconstruction Account beginning FY1999. making their recovery particularly difficult.4 95. there are many private companies bidding for banks’ NPLs in the open auction market.8 12.5
184.3
Established July 26. of FI
FY 2002
Principals of Claims Purchase Price
Cumulative until FY 2002
No.5 2. administrative costs during the purchase and during the recovery of the assets and other expenses.1
Article 53 purchase 3. in billions of JPY
FY 1999-2001
No.2
12 36 24 38 110
1. Under the Article 53 of the Financial Revitalization Law.2 NPLs acquired by the RCC As of fiscal year 2002. Table 3. While the low price does reflect the self-imposed no loss policy of the RCC.5 346.4 396.6 7. land prices have declined nearly 90% from their peak.6 137.3 NPLs acquired under Article 53 by type of financial institutions fiscal years.9
12 57 38 63 170
2. banks are not obliged to sell to the RCC. thus enabling the banks to sell to the highest bidder. Reorganised on 2 September 1996.4 1303. of FI Principals of Claims Purchase Price No. was set up to advise the DICJ in this matter.7
10.9 127. a certified public accountant and a real estate appraiser).9 3. about 8% of the book value.2 260.8 447.5 32. the assets purchased under Article 53 are of most interest. the risk that these assets may not be recoverable.Table 3.656 46.8 10.088.7 205. amongst others factors. In fact.867. the low offering price provides an indication of how overvalued certain assets may have been during the height of the bubble.7
Source: Deposit Insurance Corporation of Japan
Given expanded authority and responsibility with the “big-boned policy” in June 2001. in billions of JPY
Former HLAC1 Principals Transfer or purchase price Transfer price as % of principal
1 2
Former RCB2 21. In any event.0
210. 1996.437 4. the RCC has stepped up the purchase of NPLs and begun to play an increasingly important role in the Japanese
19
. For example.4 5. in acquiring loans under Article 53 has drawn criticisms.5
25. that the offers made by the RCC were well below market prices.9 4. A Purchase Price Examination Board. which considers.3 4.2 309. A system to determine the purchase price for transferred assets has been introduced. Long-term credit and trust banks Regional banks Members of Second Association of Regional Banks others Total % of principals
14 54 33 39 140
552.
Source: The Resolution and Collection Corporation
When assessing the contribution of the RCC and its efforts to resolve the NPL problem in the banking system.392.7 19.9 17.9 50. The low purchase price paid by the RCC for assets.748 22.0 9. comprising three external experts (a lawyer. the acquired assets appear to be of relatively low quality.392 261 7. of FI Principals of Claims Purchase Price
City.9 3.5 54.048 4.1 6.7 30.419.

In fiscal year 2001. but the progress in the recovery of assets purchased under Article 53 is hard to tell. it has been focusing primarily on the collection of NPLs that it acquired. the RCC began to participate in bank-held public auctions of NPLs in 2002 and has won approximately 25% of the biddings. amounting to almost two thirds of the total purchases in all four years combined. To the extent possible.6 trillion from the JPY 4. As of December 2002.0 65.2 30. the RCC paid a higher price for more recent loan purchases.9 19. the RCC collected more than JPY 2. First. The recovery ratio for assets under the former RCB is even higher at 67%. DICJ
The RCC has relied on either voluntary repayment or legal procedure for its collection efforts.3 67.2% paid over the FY19992001 providing more incentives for banks to sell their assets. Second. These powers include penal provisions. achieving an average collection ratio of about 60%. suggesting that these assets may have been simply warehoused in the RCC.1 trillion of NPLs.4 NPLs collection by RCC in Japan fiscal years. In total. Mitsubishi Trust & Banking Corp.
20
. an average price of almost 10% compared to the 4.5 49. There is no report of any recovery of the Article 53 assets. on 22 February 2002.5 NPL collection and disposition Given that the RCC was originally set up as a collection centre.66 trillion it purchased from the former Jusen companies.4 54.4
276 916 1550 1981 2298 2549 2672
Based on the purchase price of JPY 4656 billions
Source: The Resolution and Collection Corporation. By using trust schemes. the RCC purchased almost JPY 2. The DICJ has assisted the RCC in the collection process by making full use of its investigative powers to uncover hidden assets of debtors that may be used to repay its obligations. the RCC has considered methods such as bulk sale.7 57. asset securitisation and revitalisation of firms. In the twelve months ended March 2002.NPL market. onsite inspection of debtors and their related premises.3
Collection Ratio (%)1 2. To achieve these. Two factors may have contributed to the sharp rise in loan purchases. resulting in a collection ratio of 57%.24
Table 3. the RCC completed its first securitisation transaction in collaboration of Goldman.. the RCC.2 billion in the process. The RCC is also expected to diversify its methods of disposal25 to expedite the disposal within three years and to revitalize debtors with a prospect to survive. 3.7 33. and Asahi Bank. and questioning of debtors and related parties. the RCC collected almost JPY 6 trillion out of more than JPY 31 trillion in book value of claims. the DICJ investigated 272 cases and uncovered hidden assets worth JPY 53.4 17.4 50. Sachs.9 14. based in large part upon guidance from foreign consultants and investment banks. The RCC has performed well in recovering either of the first two types of assets under its management.3 42. has sought to resolve assets through securitisation strategies. in billions of JPY
Former HLAC Cumulative total collected 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Dec 2002
1
Former RCB Cumulative transfer price 384 597 2017 3140 3823 4180 4932 Cumulative total collected 34 86 348 953 1893 2729 3318 Collection Ratio (%) 8. 146
24 25
The estimated collection ratio can be seen as a floor as it does not include the collection from the acquired article 53 assets. As of September 2002.

thus in a sense supporting the auction price by providing a benchmark. a quick disposal of NPLs. Third. two issues amounted to JPY 83. the IRC will deal with loans to borrowers classified mainly in the second class of the FSA’s manual. the success of the IRC will crucially depend upon the IRC valuate banks’ assets and how quickly it will depose of its assets. it is not clear how the RCC handles many of the acquired assets. as the Minister for Financial Services. Again. The role of the RCC comprises the composition of the Fund. as in the case of RCC. ie. for those borrowers that are considered worth revitalising by the IRC. Another criticism of the RCC is that in focussing on collection and avoiding losing public money. the progress in restructuring the banking
21
. One of the important components of the “Comprehensive Measures to Accelerate Reforms” is to establish the Industrial Revitalisation Corporation (IRC) in early 2003 to help revitalise viable companies that are facing difficulty in servicing their debts to the banks. the RCC has made slow but steady progress in acquiring and resolving the NPLs of Japanese banks that are still in operation. who was seen as a barrier for reform. In contrast. a fund manager will also play a role. With a very thin lending margin and the decline in the value of bank shareholdings. it has not yet been decided who will be in charge of the IRC. except a designated main bank. since the appointment of Economic Minister Takenaka to replace Hakuo Yanagisawa. The BOJ announced on 18 September 2002 its own plan to purchase equities from ailing banks.6 Role of the Bank of Japan While the BOJ does not directly finance the RCC’s operations. it will provide liquidity if needed. yielding a total of 539 billion yen. including foreign investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. Many analysts are increasingly concerned about the health of Japanese banks. The DICJ argued that they would bid in every auction. In addition.7 Issues and developments So far. Since May 2002. the RCC purchased JPY 2 trillion of NPLs from banks. While the details are still under consideration and will be subject to change. the RCC has established the first “reorganisation of firm’s fund” (Fund) that includes individual private companies in order to identify the parties involved. This extra financing could come from the private sector or from the IRC. However. the IRC or a third party. suggesting still a very long way to go with a resolution of even the most conservative official estimates of JPY 42 trillion in NPLs of all banks. the BOJ supports the “Takenaka Plan” which contains various measures to accelerate the disposal of NPLs. With no specific date to wind up operations. In evaluating the extent of the NPL problem. it does not extend new loans to even viable borrowers. there are some major differences between the IRC and the RCC.cases had been resolved through asset sales. the BOJ has stressed the issue of newly generated NPLs in the banking system. an increase in the earning power of banks and companies. Indeed. the IRC will extend new loans to the debtor in order to revitalise the borrower but not the RCC. and third. coordinating amongst creditors and implementing the plan and the strategy accordingly.3 billion were successfully launched and a third issue is under consideration. Worse still. 3. The plan is seen by the BOJ as a crucial component of a strategy to prevent a financial crisis. nearly 60 firms have set up operations to compete with the RCC in the NPL market. There have been some recent developments in the authorities’ approach to deal with the banking problems in Japan. drawing up the reorganisation plan. a more realistic evaluation of NPLs via a determination of their economic value. which can be performed either by the main bank. The underlying message of such a policy shift by the BOJ is that the government ought to adopt a more determined approach towards bad debt resolution. The official argument was to reduce sensitivity to market volatility. making banks more reluctant to sell assets to the RCC. the RCC has shifted its focus to the revitalisation of firms. 3. including mini-bulk sale. This raised questions about the role of the RCC. the incentive for the RCC staff to finish the job might be compromised by the fear of losing their jobs. second. With respect to asset securitisation strategies. Second. which are likely just sitting in the RCC’s warehouse. For this. the IRC will buy the loans from all creditors. First. the RCC is still focusing in principle on the purchase of assets from borrowers classified in the two highest risk categories. Until June 2002. new proposals have been put forward. Since allowing private companies to apply for licenses to purchase bad loans from banks in 1999. It is suggested that the unwillingness and inability of banks to lend may have impaired the monetary transmission mechanism despite very easy monetary policy. The strategy is built upon three main bases: first and perhaps the most important. using public funds if necessary. “needs attention” (including “needs special attention”). While the RCC is owned by the DICJ.

banks are still carrying assets at inflated values and so are reluctant to sell them. Second. the government is not yet willing to use public funds to recapitalise the banks. such as the discount cash flow approach that requires banks to take into account the future earning potential of troubled borrowers. Banks are unwilling and cannot afford to sell their bad assets to the RCC because the system in place to resolve existing NPLs does not appear to be coherent. many of them will see their capital decline sharply below the 8% supervisory standard. As such. Obviously. the deadlock among the banks. could force a change in the management of the banks. Third. to the market price.system and resolving NPLs is still very slow. are not obliged to sell to the RCC and are not prepared to do so because such an action would require substantial write-downs. in turn. Banks. however. This may require the government injection of capital that. If the banks are forced to use tighter loan valuation standards. the RCC and the government inhibits the functioning of the AMC to meaningfully resolve NPLs in the Japanese banking system.
22
. the RCC has insisted on buying bad loans at market price to avoid making any losses. banks can ill afford to do what would otherwise be a sound banking practise. upon sale. First.

MOFE. Korea was hard hit by the severe financial crisis that beset many of emerging Asian economies.
Korea Asset Management Corporation (KAMCO)
4. To stabilise the Korean economy and financial system. KDB and outside professional organisations. KAMCO is a centralised and public funded resolution agency that handles NPAs of all financial institutions in Korea. however. KAMCO was initially established in 1962 as a subsidiary of the state-owned Korean Development Bank (KDB). a large-scale IMF support package of some USD 60 billion. It supervises KAMCO’s operations. was put in place. With the onset of the Asian financial crisis. together with massive government financial resources. While KDIC concentrates on offering depositor protection and direct recapitalisation of troubled financial institutions. KAMCO’s roles have been substantially reorganised and expanded through a series of new laws. the principal asset management corporation (AMC) that deals with non-performing assets (NPA) of financial institutions in Korea. The estimated peak level of NPAs in the financial system are believed to far exceed KRW 100 trillion. The Korean government placed a heavy reliance on Korea Asset Management Corporation (KAMCO). respectively. They do.1 Overview From 1997 through 1999. while the Public Fund Oversight Committee. KAMCO is under the direct supervision of the Financial Supervisory Commission (FSC) and works closely with the Ministry of Finance and Economy (MOFE). Its original mandate was to serve as a conduit for the disposal of non-performing loans owned by KDB. there is no formal mechanism for the coordination between KAMCO and KDIC. Large current account shortfalls. the Korea Deposit Insurance Corporation (KDIC) also played a key role in the stabilisation of the Korean economy. complement each other in the overall
23
.represents more than twice of its annual 2001 GDP and commercial bank lending amounts to some 60% of GDP. KAMCO has KRW 140 billion in initial paid-in equity capital and is 95% owned by the state.
Graph 4. equivalent to 8% of the overall financial system or 18% of GDP. MOFE. a heavy reliance on short-term external financing and serious currency mismatch for both debtors and creditors all contributed to a devastating financial crisis that caused the Korean economy to contract by nearly 7% in 1998 and the whole financial system to be shaken to its foundation. monitors the KAMCO transactions at the Non-Performing Asset Management Fund account (NPA Fund). Official and market estimates of non-performing loans as a ratio of loans outstanding for the commercial banks reached 8.1. The Management Supervisory Committee of KAMCO is composed of KAMCO’s CEO as well as officials from the FSC.3% and 15%. at the end of 1999 during the Asian crisis. led by MOFE. Bank of Korea and several other related government agencies and professional organizations. a highly leveraged corporate sector.in terms of total assets .1 KAMCO’s supervisory and regulatory environments
FSC KAMCO NPA Fund N P A a q u is itio n a n d re s o lu tio n
MOFE D e p o s it p ro te c tio n a n d re c a p ita lis a tio n
K D IC
Note: KDIC is supervised through the Policy Committee comprising senior officials from the FSC.
In addition to KAMCO.4. Korea’s financial system . As shown in Graph 4.

though it continues to acquire NPAs on its own book such as the latest purchase of bad debts from the troubled credit card companies. Both. which in turn came under intense government pressure to bring down their NPA levels and to reach the required 8% capital adequacy ratio within a short period of time in order to survive. Losses from both KAMCO and KDIC represent overall fiscal costs of broader financial restructuring in Korea. It should be noted that most of these purchases. Bank of Korea does not have direct financial exposure to operations of the NPA Fund. KAMCO stopped NPA acquisitions via the NPA Fund account. under intense pressure to stabilize the system.3 NPA Acquisition Since the establishment of the NPA Fund. The pricing of NPA acquisition evolved over the market cycles. some 60% have been acquired from commercial banks and another 20% from trust and investment companies. 4. As of December 2002. depending on the prevailing market environment. KAMCO has taken over a substantial amount of distressed assets from both viable and non-viable financial institutions. Therefore. amount and from which financial institutions to purchase NPLs. Of KAMCO’s NPA purchases. mainly to assist the NPA fund in meeting its initial cash needs. KAMCO bonds typically have a maturity of one to five years. In the early stage of the Asian crisis (1997-1999). 4. KAMCO was mandated to take over half of the estimated KRW100 trillion in NPAs of Korean financial institutions at that time. less than one third of the money was used to resolve troubled assets through KAMCO. KAMCO has bought NPAs from the KDIC worth KRW 7 trillion. cumulative acquisitions on NPAs by the NPA Fund have exceeded KRW 110 trillion in face value. For example. However. took place between 1998 and 2000 with acquisition figures dropping off significantly since that time (Table 1). however.2 The NPA Fund and financing As the designated operator of the NPA Fund. the central bank. The Bank of Korea does not directly supervise KAMCO’s operations and would affect the functioning of KAMCO mainly through its joint banking inspections with FSC. Typically. The methodologies employed by KAMCO to acquire NPAs and to establish an appropriate acquisition price differ across loan categories and have evolved over time . did acquire about 10% of the total NPA bond issuance at a fairly favourable interest rate of 5% in 1998 compared to the then prevailing double-digit market rates. NPA bonds issued by KAMCO for the NPA Fund allowed the selling banks to improve their capital base and to meet the minimum 8% capital adequacy ratio within a short period of time. KAMCO carries out is responsibilities to function as an AMC for the financial sector by acquiring NPAs under the NPA Fund account. KAMCO decided the timing. after a due diligence process. This figure represents 9% of Korea’s entire financial sector’s assets or some 20% of 2002 GDP. which at one point reached double digit levels at the height of the Asian crisis. since the repayments of the NPA bonds issued by KAMCO are fully government-guaranteed. primarily through KDIC. principal and interest of the NPA bonds are fully guaranteed by the Korean government. Nevertheless. requests for assets to be purchased by KAMCO from financial institutions would come from the financial institutions themselves. fix-rate and floating coupons and yield market interest rates. Established in November 1997. By November 2002. KAMCO bonds have been the principal source of funding for the NPA Fund and are mainly issued to banks selling NPAs to finance the purchases of NPAs. The remainder was used for recapitalising financial institutions and insured deposit payments. with a zero percent risk weight for regulatory capital calculation purposes. Some observers estimate that the expected total financial loss related to the restructuring of the financial sector could exceed 40% of the total injected public funds or 12% of 2001 GDP.restructuring in the financial system. Of the estimated injection of KRW 150 trillion (USD 120 billion) in public funds for financial restructuring in Korea so far. In 1998. the NPA Fund has received approximately 95% of its financing from bonds issued by KAMCO. These option-enhanced agreements allowed KAMCO to rapidly transfer large volumes of NPAs under extremely chaotic market conditions while retaining the
24
. signalling the winding down of KAMCO’s principal mission — operating the NPA Fund. The ex post individual settlements were in effect a kind of put/call options that were a central feature of the bulk purchase approach. this represents 6% of the total NPAs acquired by KAMCO. KAMCO acquired assets through socalled “bulk purchases” with ex post individual settlement agreements to speed up NPA transfers to KAMCO. Therefore. The Bank of Korea.

KAMCO.
Total KAMCO payments for NPA acquisitions via the NPA Fund account have reached some KRW40 trillion. thereby releasing KAMCO from a rather significant financial obligation. The former are loans under court reorganisation while the latter mostly comprise loans to consumers and small and medium sized companies that are overdue thee-months or more.95 1. KAMCO has paid for its assets purchases entirely through bonds. In addition.83 18. However.79 Ratio (%) 64. KAMCO has also adjusted its pricing criteria along with market conditions over time (Appendix). the payment to the selling financial institution was made in both cash (one-third) and bonds (two thirds). and KAMCO sensibly adjusted its purchasing methods from the option-enhanced bulk purchases to one of fixed-rate purchases.2). Thus far. of which less than 3.
Table 4.9 36. Second. Initially.4 39.5 11. approximately 40% were collateralised. Such options helped inject capital into the banking system at time of extreme turbulence. KAMCO took over half of the total loans outstanding to the Daewoo group under special private workout terms.000 loan accounts.2 32.46 12. the acquisition price for NPAs established and agreed upon between KAMCO and the selling financial institution will be final for both parties.00 8. Under this approach. KAMCO has taken over more than 300. Such a methodology raises the question of whether the balance sheets of the selling financial institutions remained exposed to the supposedly stripped-out NPAs.97 6. the government itself.3 24.06 32.06 39. made the interest payments on the NPA bonds.29 32.6 37.1 NPA acquisition via the NPA Fund (in trillions of KRW)
Year 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Cumulative Face Value 11.26 4.000 accounts represent more than 90% of the amount of NPLs acquired. As Korea’s financial market and economy regained some composure by mid 1999. it has paid.
25
. a positive factor facilitating KAMCO’s asset recovery. both KAMCO and the selling institutions have gained more time and better market information to assess transactions related to the earlier NPA transfers.1 and 4.96 110. Of the total assets acquired by KAMCO.14 12.11 Purchase Price 7. as opposed to KAMCO.1
Sources: Corporate Planning Department and Corporate Policy and Strategic Management Office. The NPAs assumed by KAMCO can be broadly classified into two categories: corporate restructuring loans and ordinary loans. since mid-1999. How could KAMCO acquire assets representing twice the NPA Fund’s authorised funding? There are two main reasons. nearly double the total amount of the authorized funding of the NPA Fund but representing less than one third of the total injected public funds for financial restructuring. on average.92 1. First. some one third of the face value for NPAs (Table 4.option for either KAMCO to put or the selling bank to call the stripped-out assets in case the initial bulk purchase prices and the eventual resolution or evaluation prices turned out to differ substantially. KAMCO used monies from the collection or sale of NPAs to acquire additional NPAs from financial institutions.

However.6 0. as Korea’s financial conditions return to normality. it is not clear whether exercising such options should be treated as genuine NPA disposition from the perspective of the whole Korean financial system. KAMCO managed to recover more than it had originally paid.6 52. as its recovery rates has so far exceeded its acquisition prices.3 24. Of total recoveries.06 0. KAMCO still manages to have achieved a 44% recovery rate measured against the book value of the resolved assets.9 12.4 36.7 22.14
Source: Corporate Planning Department and Corporate Policy and Strategic Management Office. The put options might have played an important role in KAMCO’s impressive recovery performance.10 0.50 7. In addition. since they allowed KAMCO to avoid making large financial losses through recourse and cancellation in case the bulk purchase prices paid by KAMCO far exceeded the actual market prices. By the same token. having resolved some 60% of its acquired NPAs and achieving a recovery rate of almost 50% of book value (Table 3).07 0. selling financial institutions called back their sold assets. KAMCO’s record of NPA resolution has been quite impressive. While exercising put options would allow KAMCO to remove the acquired assets off its balance sheet.11 Purchasing price (B) 24.30 2. only 3% is reportedly non-cash. putting pressure on KAMCO to improve its asset recovery efficiency.Table 4. An alternate view of the put/call options might suggest that they may have provided the much-needed capital to Korea’s financial system during a crisis period. Exercising such embedded options results in cancellations or recourses in resolution.4 37. even after taking away all the recourse and cancellation. otherwise. in trillions of KRW
Type Banks Merchant banks Guarantee insurance Life insurance Securities Mutual savings Foreign financial institutions Financial resolution entities under KDIC Investment trust companies Others Total Face value (A) 61.78 22.21 2.53 5.14 0.72 1.39 0. these put/call options have helped keep the acquisition prices close to market clearing levels and keep KAMCO under competitive pressure to dispose of NPAs efficiently.75 0.62 1. B/A (%) 40.4 41.01 6. Thus.66 110.2 Cumulative NPA acquisition by type of financial institutions
as of December 2002.79 Purchase price ratio.01 39.
4.08 0.
26
. Nevertheless. doing so will only return the stripped-out assets back to the book of the original selling institution.84 8. KAMCO.30 0.82 3. which have accounted for one third of the overall resolution.0 46. the selling institution may exercise its call option.4 NPA Resolution To date.7 39.

to manage and dispose of real estate in the case of AMCs joint ventures or to enhance corporate values in the case of corporate restructuring joint venture companies (CRCs). banks have often preferred to deal directly with their remaining and new NPAs through their internal resolution departments.(1) Bulk loan resolution. partial forgiveness of loan principal or accrued interest. however. more stringent provisioning rules and easing credit and economic cycles. KAMCO. The NPL ratio of commercial banks has fallen from double-digit levels to some 3% as of year-end 2002 With NPA ratios at relatively low levels and the broader economic recovery underway.5 Outlook KAMCO’s acquisition and disposition of NPAs have peaked and will be gradually wound down as the Korean banking system is nursed back to health. which have facing the challenges of a turbulent bond market. selected NPA pools are transferred to special purpose vehicles. 4. as of November 2002. typically on a 50%-50% basis. KAMCO is actively searching for a new role into the future. The final agreement with the debtor may involve an amendment of loan terms such as payment rescheduling.75% of face value Unsecured Loan 20% . The latter are partly through debt-for-equity swaps between the CRCs and the corporate debtors. KAMCO enters into joint ventures with foreign investors. (4) Collection and payments by rescheduling. as currently. This methodology involves debt workouts conducted outside of the legal system or restructuring under the court ordered programs. This involves international bidding for NPA pools and the issuance of asset-backed securities (ABS). (2) Foreclosure and public auctions. either the NPAs or their underlying assets are auctioned and/or sold individually. Both outright sales and profit sharing schemes have been included in the NPA pools and ABS. KAMCO has been again involved in taking over sizable problem assets from troubled credit card companies. Indeed. higher delinquent ratio credit. Moreover. For ABS. with the former being partly motivated to attract foreign currency inflows. Its role may be revived again lately.
Appendix
Table A4. and debt-for-equity swaps. (3) Joint venture partnerships. mainly through offering international consulting and training services to other countries by leveraging its NPA resolution know-how and skills.60% of face value Purchasing method
45% of collateral value **
Bulk purchase and settlement
28
.1 KAMCO’s NPA purchase and pricing methods (A) Restructured corporate NPAs
Price Criteria Period Secured Loan Nov 97 – Jul 98 Sep 98 – Jun 99 70% . which in turn issue debts backed by the underlying assets. it ceased additional NPA acquisitions via the NPA Fund account. and individual loan sales. Through courts (foreclosure) or KAMCO. KAMCO will continue to dispose of the remaining acquired NPAs under the NPA Fund account and also to purchase NPAs on its own account. may be in a first-loss position due to its issuance of subordinated bonds to provide credit enhancement for the ABS issuances.

The goal of the Steering Committee is to oversee and monitor the policies and procedures in place at the three institutions and to monitor their progress. (Danaharta). which currently comprises ten bank holdings. The coordination of these organisations is provided by a Steering Committee. As of 31 December 1998. into ten institutions. This was consistent with the long-term objective to create a core of domestic banking institutions.5. mainly as subordinated capital loans. representing a coherent approach to strengthening the banking sector. Both institutions. and third. Evidence of this was the 6. well above the 8% minimum. the injection of capital into the banks is restricted to viable financial institutions only. Especially in the case of Danamodal. a wholly owned subsidiary of Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM). Table 1 helps to illustrate the seriousness of the problem. Undercapitalised banks that received capital injections were then required to sell all of their NPLs to Danaharta. The above three institutional bodies are complementary in terms of their objectives. including the implementation of sound risk management and good corporate governance.2%. Based upon the conclusions. As a strategic shareholder in the recapitalised bank. second. Danamodal. Danaharta’s primary mission is to remove the non-performing assets from the system and manage them with the goal to maximise the proceeds from the recovery process.1 Overview Tight fiscal and monetary policies adopted in late 1997 as a result of economic problems being experienced elsewhere in the region resulted in a sharp rise in interest rates and a rapid slowdown of economic activity. In order to achieve this goal. was set up to facilitate the recapitalisation of banking institutions in cases where shareholders were not able to do so. both debtors and creditors that would result in debt restructuring in a manner acceptable to all concerned parties without the imminent threat of legal actions. the establishment of Danamodal Nasional Berhad (Danamodal). Danamodal and Danaharta. where the focus clearly was on a rapid recovery of the corporate sector and a strengthening of the banking sector. Malaysia Asset Management Corporation (DANAHARTA)
5. international specialists were involved in the due diligence reviews of banks to confirm which ones were indeed viable. The economic decline led to a similar deterioration in the asset quality of bank’s balance sheets and an increase in non-performing loans (NPLs).
30
.8% per annum. Pengurusan Danaharta Bhd.6 %. Danamodal had stopped its business already in December 2002 and CDRC in July 2002.7% decline in GDP in 1988 after 12 years of steady expansion averaging 7. the risk weighted capital ratio was still at 11. each comprising a former commercial bank and merchant bank as well as a former finance company. are required to apply market based principles to avoid wasting public money. the Malaysian government adopted a four-pillar approach to restructure and to strengthen the banking sector well before the NPL ratio reached its peak in the Asian financial crisis. a Corporate Debt Restructuring Committee (CRDC). In addition to the institutional arrangements. Applying market-based principles was the policy of the CDRC’s Creditor Committees. The first pillar of the strategy was the establishment on 20 June 1998 of a national asset management company. which had been implemented at the same time. The third pillar of the approach was to restructure corporate debts on a broader basis. All three organisations face a finite lifetime: Danaharta will cease to exist in 2005. Only when creditors and debtors failed to reach consensus would Danaharta eventually make an offer to purchase NPLs from the affected banks. Danamodal would focus on the restructuring of the banks. chaired by the Governor of BNM. a special purpose vehicle responsible for capital injection for viable banks. the forth pillar came into force in January 1998 when the Malaysian government announced a merger program for banks and finance companies in order to consolidate and rationalise the banking industry.1% figure only a year earlier. and interdependent at the same time. In spite of this. triple from the 4. a merger programme for banks. incorporated on 10 August 1998. in 1998 Danamodal injected RM 6.15 billion. To carry out this task. The other three pillars were: first. In response to the deepening problems. CDRC was created to provide a platform for the involved parties. NPLs as a percentage of total loans stood at 13.

1 11.256 49. hence without causing any costs for
26
NPLs from Bank Bumiputra Malaysia Berhad (BBMB Group) and Sime Bank Berhad (Sime Group)
31
.9 8.540 46.2 18.789 71.0 6.801 61. Danaharta has been in its final stage of its mandate: managing and disposing of the acquired assets. providing banks with the option to reject an offer made by Danaharta. Beginning December 1997. Many banks changed the NPL classification scheme at the end of 1998.6 8.243
NPL/GDP (%) 6.795 283.8 14.6% on the three-month scheme to below 8% on a six-month scheme.2 7.4 4. This brought the NPL ratio down from the late 1998 level of 13.4 9.732 281.5 3.693 58. Non-performing loans = Non-performing loans – interest-in-suspense – specific provisions. Danaharta principles have been a system wide carve-out of NPLs and a market-driven approach in valuation of NPLs.480 25.828 64.320 12.157
2001
334.82 billion acquired from 66 financial institutions and RM27.Table 5.7 4.9 27.406 65. However.953 52.1 13.885
1999
300. In its early stage in 1998. consisting of RM19.764
2000
342. Danaharta acquired and managed NPLs totalling RM15. Other financing sources include a maximum of RM2 billion loan from Employee’s Provident Fund (EBF) and an investment arm of the Ministry of Finance (Khazanah) as well as public borrowings (including AMC bonds) of a maximum of RM15 billion. Danaharta’s offer for NPLs is based on whatever scheme banks deemed as appropriate for each account when they submitted their NPLs to Danaharta.8 15.5 19.1 10. after completing its acquisition of NPLs. with a government equity injection of RM3 billion.2 (%) 5.8 16. where the NPLs are being managed on behalf of the Malaysian government and BNM26.5
14.589
2002
1
361597–
Total loans = Outstanding gross loans (including housing loans sold to Cagamas Berhad). ratios are computed in a net basis. with the government guaranteeing all borrowings. By year-end 2002. CEIC. February 2003.5 8.5 21. It is wholly owned by the Ministry of Finance. Danaharta’s NPL portfolio reached RM47.7 6.053 76.1 billion or 20% of the total NPLs in the banking system.
5.2 Danaharta Danaharta is a publicly funded AMC incorporated under the Companies Act of 1965. Since 2002.3
2
NPL/Total loans1. Its objectives are the removal of NPL’s from bank’s balance sheets and maximisation of the recovery value of the distressed assets so as to minimise the cost borne by the government.3 23. Total loans = Outstanding gross loans – interest-in-suspense – specific provision.003 76. Danaharta employs about 280 staff and can be seen as hermaphrodite between a rapid disposition agency and a warehouse agency. in millions of RM
NPLs 1995 1996 1997 1998
3 months 6 months 3 months 6 months 3 months 6 months 3 months 6 months 3 months 6 months
GDP 222. most loans were still based on the six-months NPL classification.0 18.473 253.6 18.94 million from two designated banks.3 11.76 billion. moving from a three-month classification to a six-month scheme. Sources: Bank Negara Malaysia Monthly Statistical Bulletin.1 Non-performing loans in Malaysia Year-end value.

in all cases. Given these participation structures. BNM had recovered most of its investments through consolidation of the banking system.76 billion comprising 2905 individual accounts (Table 2). The Corporate Debt Restructuring Committee is run by a Steering Committee. Danaharta offers the value of the underlying collateral based on an independent appraisal. Acquisition prices are typically negotiated at an arm’s length basis. For unsecured loans.03 billion. there is a two-week transfer time. Furthermore. Danaharta may pay either the nominal sum or a percentage of principal outstanding based on estimates.94 billion with 2101 accounts from the Sime Group and BBMB Group managed on behalf of the government. procedures and progress of the three agencies. banks’ capital ratios are improved. In the case of realised losses. BNM serves as the chair of the Steering Committee to oversee policies. of which banks have rejected RM8. BNM and the Securities Commission. Danaharta employs three types of loan valuation techniques.
27
Non-BAFIA financial institutions and Islamic banks receive cash
32
. however. but in point of fact. In November 1998. In principle. banking and the legal areas. Therefore. In any case. since the market is not very liquid. the offer is simply 10% of the outstanding principal. Third. 5. As a consequence. This leaves Danaharta with the acquired NPLs of RM47. These loans represent around 10% of Danaharta’s portfolio and Danaharta has full recourse up to the purchase price if actual recoveries are less than the original purchase price. each appointed by the Minister of Finance. The transferred assets are then typically replaced on the bank’s balance sheet with zero coupon bonds27 that are government guaranteed. and it can acquire loans without the borrowers’ consent. the Ministry of Finance and the private-sector who have experience in accounting. for secured loans. As of December 2002. it is required to write the NPLs down to 80% of the offer price. with a zero percent risk-weight assigned to these bonds. as noted above. especially those where valuations are expensive and subject to much debate where it is difficult to determine initial purchase prices. Danaharta has only been involved in loans exceeding RM5 million. if a bank does not accept an offer to sell its NPLs to Danaharta.4 Role of Bank Negara Malaysia BNM fully owns Danamodal and has injected RM7.6 billion cash into ten banks in order to recapitalise them. This includes RM27. It comprises three members representing the Ministry of Finance. there is no loss sharing arrangement with the bank. there is a strong incentive for banks to sell their NPLs to Danaharta. BNM has an equity share of about RM3 billion in the 10 banks. Both approaches provide banks a profit-sharing feature providing the bank with 80% of any recovery in excess of Danaharta’s associated direct recovery costs. which account for more than 70% of system-wide NPLs.44 billion. 5. an oversight committee for Danaharta was established to approve appointments and terminations of special administrators and independent advisors including their recommendations. By the end of 2001. This early action has allowed the Malaysian financial system to survive relatively unscathed when compared to the financial systems of some of its Asian neighbours. the bonds are tradable. Specifically. The funding structure for Danaharta’s operations comprised at year-end 2002 the initial capital of RM3 billion from the Government and RM11. although borrowers then have to deal with Danaharta directly. Most of the NPL portfolio represents loans in the property and manufacturing sectors which are typically large in size. with representatives from the BNM.3 NPL acquisition The pre-emptive mission of Danaharta has allowed financial institutions in Malaysia to clean up their balance sheets at an early stage based on market-driven principle and to refocus on their lending activities. using either the “net tangible asset” or the “discounted cash flow” method for the NPL evaluation. Danaharta endorses the Malaysian Code on Corporate Governance issued in March 2002. First. unlike the profit sharing scheme. The tenor of these bonds is five years. Danaharta has the power and ability to move quickly in transferring assets from a bank. with a roll-over option for another five years.Danaharta.54 billion other outstanding liabilities. It therefore recognises and practises the need to conduct its business in a transparent and professional manner in line with international best practice. their marketability is drawn into question. for certain large loans. Second. for cost-efficiency reasons. Danaharta has evaluated and made offers to loans in the size of RM56.

it employs two main approaches when managing and disposing of NPLs: (1) loan management.2 123.3).8 1.82 No.The NPL acquisition exhibited a face value of RM19.5 1. Under the loan management approach.15 8.817.7 42. which provides the borrowers the opportunity to restructure their loans.1 104. of Accounts 202 770 828 805 804 Purchase Price 3.22 9. in millions of RM
Type Commercial Banks Finance Companies Merchant Banks Development Finance Institutions Offshore Others Total
Source: Danaharta Operations Reports
Face Value 11. partial cash settlement and asset disposal. recovery is mainly through loan restructuring.867.7 749. Danaharta distinguishes between viable and non-viable loans. (2) settlement of loans.82 billion and the purchase price was RM9.39 19. rapid disposition is not feasible and that for some assets obtained by Danaharta through the resolution process.11 19. An even higher expected recovery of 76% might be realised in a pure settlement of loans with an outright disposal.434. The resolution of these viable loans can be categorised into three types: (1) plain loan restructuring.03 9.8
Purchasing Price 4.412.2 NPL Acquisition cumulative as of 31 December 2002. and (3) schemes of arrangement. with an average discount of 54% (Tables 5.0 3.032. Plain loan restructuring includes rescheduled loans. which carry a higher historical recovery rate. Viable loans are placed under loan restructuring.161.889.811.0 3.35 9.211.4 NPL resolution As Danaharta is neither a rapid disposition nor a warehouse agency.4 1.2 and 5. such as real estate collateral and equity in the debtor’s company. ongoing management is needed to maximize the value of the asset. foreclosure or disposal of the loan. In the former approach.03 billion.7 9.82 19. The latter approach acknowledges the fact that in some cases.3 NPL acquisition by type of financial institutions cumulative as of 31 December 2002.1
Discount 61% 51% 44% 35% 15% 0% 54%
5.4)
33
. (Table 5.Dec 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 8.13 20. in millions of RM
Face Value 20Jun . Table 5. and is carrying currently an expected fairly high recovery rate of over 75%.7 19.1 42.03 Discount 61% 56% 55% 54% 54%
Source: Danaharta Operations Reports
Table 5. and (2) asset management.

65 billion in cash and RM56 millions units in securities at par value.19 billion29. mainly due to interest received on restructured loans and gains or losses on sale of foreclosed collateral and securities Source: Danaharta Operations Reports
In sum.7 3.7 0.1 3. One of the incentives for banks to sell NPLs to Danaharta is that with the higher recovery rates achieved.2 6.6
6.4 1.7 15. Does not include adjustments.14 billion.6 0. As of December 2002. Including adjustments. As of December 2002.2
– 4.AAA senior notes (sold in a broad-based investor scheme) and RM285 million of unrated subordinated notes were kept at Danaharta’s special purpose vehicle Securita28.5 times.7 2.1 0.4 0. as of December 2002 Danaharta has realised in cash RM 14.1 5. mainly due to interest received on restructured loans and gains or losses on sale of foreclosed collateral and securities.8 0.5).3 6.3
Figures may not cast correctly due to rounding errors.4 6.0 0. Danaharta obtains cash generated from direct loan sales.6 billion of its recovery.4 12. with RM12.0
– 5. which is set to wind down by 2005.3 6.4 0.7 0. they can benefit from the above 80%-20% profit sharing scheme.5 Breakdown of recovery received 2000 to 2002.0 1. coordinated bank restructuring strategy and sufficient financial support all contributed to the efficient operations of Danaharta.7 7. In sum.5 12. Danaharta redistributed to FIs its surplus recovery of RM9.4
5.4
4.2 1. Table 5. Danaharta expected to receive RM30. For defaulted loans the assumption is a zero recovery.8
6. At the same time. the remaining balance of cash of RM6. The issue has been seen as a milestone in Malaysia’s debt securities market in spite of a high level of built-in credit enhancement.3 0.1 0.
35
. This implies that currently RM5 billion of taxpayers’ money are needed to close the operations of Danaharta. as well as securities as a result of settlement schemes and properties.9 1.3 2.7 8.7 18. special legal powers.14 billion is available for redemption of outstanding bonds with a face value of RM11. restructured loans as part of the viable loans scheme. The strong political backing.6 0.7 0. in billions of RM
2000 Asset Group Cash Restructured loans Securities Properties Total
1
2
2001
Realised in cash Recovery received Stock value Realised in cash Recovery received
2002
Stock value Realised in cash2
Recovery received
Stock value
4.31 billion already recovered in cash (Table 5.5 0.9
– 4.3 8.6
5. Danaharta seemed to have served as a fairly effective policy instrument in removing and resolving NPLs and in asset recovery.
28 29
The offer was very well received with an over-subscription of 3.

assets in the financial sector amounted to THB8. and export demand all declined. however. Most importantly. The impact of these factors and the crisis as a whole. As the economy grew. according to the Emergency Decree. had an immediate affect on the financial sector in Thailand. The growth. and pension funds.30 As the financial crisis began to unfold. however. Thai Asset Management Company (TAMC)
6. these rules and regulations were enhanced to be more in line with the international standards. There were several strategies employed by the Thai authorities in an attempt to reduce the level of NPLs in the banking system.9 trillion (USD212 billion) or 190% of GDP. real estate prices soared. the demand for real estate increased and as a consequence. NPL refers to any loan for which the payment of principal and/ or interest is in excess of 3 months. consumption. investment. the authorities followed the practice of many other Asian countries and established a government-owned and operated asset management company. This single event. an increase in short-term foreign debt. marked the beginning of the financial crisis in Thailand and indeed. the TAMC can restructure loans and lend additional money to borrowers.7% by May 1999.6. Subquality refer to those assets that are classified loss. bankers eagerly lent funds despite the fact that supply was rapidly outpacing demand. This was followed by a law that encouraged banks to establish their own private asset management companies (AMCs) as subsidiaries. forced the Thai authorities to float the Thai baht on 2 July 1997. an inefficient legal system that made the foreclosure process lengthy and cumbersome. Financial institution. mutual fund management companies. An overwhelming percentage of the commercial loans in Thailand are real estate secured. more than anything else. their ability to repay debts.1 Background During the roughly ten years prior to 1997. the Thai economy grew at an annual rate of almost 10%. it can only acquire their subquality assets. restructure the business operations of borrowers in an attempt to improve their financial operations and in turn. borrowers with loans secured by commercial real estate defaulted as did many other retail and consumer borrowers. Initially. 14 branches of foreign banks. 6. connected lending and other credit risk standards imposed by the Bank of Thailand (BoT). of which commercial banks accounted for 64% of the total.6%in May 1997 to 47. however. The vast majority of subquality assets transferred to TAMC came from state-owned banks and are obligations of larger borrowers involved in multi-creditor transactions. This profitability. includes commercial banks. the baht depreciated sharply and economic activity. finance companies (including those that also undertake securities business).2 Creation and Mandate of TAMC The Thai Asset Management Company (TAMC) was established by an Emergency Decree (Law) on 8 June 2001 as a state agency. or substandard according to the Bank of Thailand's regulation on the classification of assets. One of the key differences between TAMC and other AMC structures. and seize and dispose of collateral. With the spreading of the crisis throughout Asia. in Asia. appreciation of the real exchange rate. and a weak financial sector. it can. resulting in a large current account deficit. is that the TAMC does not have the power to sell loans to third-parties. Prior to the crisis. 91 finance and securities companies. and credit foncier companies. and accounting rules that did not conform to international standards. Thailand’s financial sector consisted of 15 domestic commercial banks.
31
32
36
. The TAMC will consolidate the management of subquality31 assets of financial institutions32 and AMCs with the goal of restructuring the debts and/or reorganising the debtor’s business operations in an effort to return the firm to profitability and enable it to repay its debts. however. which is based on both quantitative (number of months overdue) and qualitative criteria. To meet the apparently insatiable demand for commercial and retail space. The Law provides the TAMC with broad powers to manage its assets and improve their ultimate collectibility. In other
30
Compounding the problem were lax classification and provisioning. doubtful. After the crisis.The TAMC does not have the authority to acquire ownership interests in banks. doubtful of loss. Ultimately. sell foreclosed real estate to third-parties. Commercial banks enjoyed a period of high profitability during the economic boom. 7 specialised financial institutions and a variety of other smaller institutions including savings and agricultural cooperatives. a Corporate Debt Restructuring Agency was established to facilitate the restructuring of loans by banks and their borrowers. was realised in part because of imprudent lending practices that came back to haunt the banks in the form of NPLs. In total. The effect of this was to cause the level of NPLs in commercial banks to increase from 11.

The Law encourages prompt resolution of the subquality assets in an environment that promotes cooperation and a continued relationship between debtors and creditors. a separate legal entity within the BoT. In anticipation of 60. all appointed by the Minister of Finance and approved by the Council of Ministers. which is comprised of no more than five members and is responsible for auditing the TAMC and the performance of the Managing Director. but remaining unsold. Activities necessary to fulfil the aforementioned responsibilities have been outsourced to Pricewaterhouse Coopers. the strengthening of the economy. including the setting of operational rules. Virtually all of the initial capital was invested in the BoT’s repurchase market at an interest rate of about 2. The TAMC can increase its capitalisation through the issuance of shares to the public or any other person upon approval of the Council of Ministers. Any remaining assets and the books and records of the TAMC would then be passed to the Ministry of Finance. 6. Any shares issued to increase the TAMC's capitalisation. or 7 June 2013. the TAMC staff was approximately 110 persons most of whom are BoT employees. directors shall serve a term of six years and are prohibited from a political position or being an official of a political party during their term. implementing and monitoring debt restructuring schemes. disposal of real property acquired through foreclosure and liquidation of debtors. the TAMC will oversee the management of the loan until it is fully paid-off or the collateral is foreclosed upon and sold. established in the 1980s. the TAMC organisational structure included two asset management departments and one property management and business restructuring department. four asset management departments and one business restructuring department. The board of directors has broad policy setting powers. Of the 12 directors. will be purchased by the FIDF. In this capacity. Staffing was increased to 200 in early 2002 and subsequently to 330. The board of directors will appoint an internal audit committee. the TAMC was established not as a liquidation authority. the TAMC shall prepare to cease its ongoing operations after the tenth year and to liquidate all remaining assets no later than twelve years from the date of the Law. According to the Law. The public offering of shares by the FIDF is not required to comply with laws regulating such activity. The asset management departments are generally responsible for assessing the viability of borrowers and businesses and planning. although there are several intermediary dates that may cause the TAMC to cease its operations earlier than the latest date allowed in the law. another from the Thai Chamber of Commerce and a third must represent the Thai Bankers Association. The Managing Director shall serve as an ex officio member. 33 The initial capital of TAMC was one billion baht all owned by the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF). the Minister of Finance will appoint a working group to evaluate the operations and performance of the TAMC and recommend whether the TAMC should be eliminated or allowed to continue its operations. At inception and until mid-2002. The executive committee has the powers. the number of the main departments was increased in 2002 from three to five. regulations and procedures. The board of directors also appoints the managing director to a four year term. business reorganisation of debtors. to provide liquidity and solvency support to financial institutions. duties and responsibilities to manage the subquality assets acquired from financial institutions. The external audit is performed by the Office of the Auditor General. each of whom shall have a term of four years.e. the board of
33
Two years after enactment of the Law. at least one must be a representative of the Federation of Thai Industries.words. In any event.
37
. The board of directors shall appoint an executive committee comprised of a chairman and a maximum of three other members. In essence. but as a rehabilitation and restructuring agency. The TAMC has a sunset date twelve years from the date of the Law. Initially.000 new small balance debtor cases being transferred from state-owned banks. Its focus is on the revival and continuation of businesses to enable them to repay their debts and as a consequence. the BoT issued short-term notes to fund the initial capital of TAMC.5%.3 Organisation Structure and Oversight The TAMC has a board of directors comprised of a Chairman and a maximum of 11 other members. In summary. it approves and gives instructions pertaining to debt restructuring. The business restructuring department manages business restructuring plans to support the asset management and business restructuring processes. i. and is responsible for supervising the general affairs of the TAMC. The Chairman of the executive committee shall serve as an ex officio member. By law.

(2) the subquality asset must have two or more financial institutions as creditors. and the debtor must be a juristic person. the TAMC shall prepare and submit a business report summarizing its operations for the previous year and plans and expected results for the coming year. The asset must (1) be a NPL as of 31 December 2000 and be secured. Assets transferred from the first group of financial institutions will include both single and multiple-creditor loans and are expected to account for approximately 80 percent of total asset transfers. but it does monitor the activities of the TAMC and is frequent contact with it. be appraised according to the Bank of Thailand’s regulations on Collateral Valuation and Appraisal. It is also important to note that the transfer of qualifying assets by government or FIDF owned financial institutions is obligatory while the transfer of assets by privately owned financial institutions is optional. the Bankruptcy Court can not have approved a rehabilitation plan that includes the NPL in question. It is expected that the later value should approximate the economic value of the asset. the results of which are provided to the Minister of Finance.4. and (5) prior to the effective date of the Law. (4) within 30 days of the date the Law becomes effective. 6. but has delegated this authority to the BoT. the collateral value shall be appraised in accordance with the rules specified by the TAMC Board of Directors. but have not received any verdict from the court. 6. but unpaid. at the time of the transfer. The Law requires that the collateral value for the purposes of determining the asset transfer price. In addition. If a gain. including assets where the financial institution and borrower are involved in a lawsuit to settle the debt and assets. Private financial institutions may transfer subquality assets to the TAMC provided the asset meets certain conditions. in cases where transferors are financial institutions. measured as a recovery that is in excess of the
34
Book value is equal to the outstanding unpaid principal balance at the time of transfer plus a maximum of 90 days of interest accrued.
38
. a restructuring agreement between the financial institution and the debtor cannot be entered into.3 Gain-Loss Sharing Arrangement Applied to Transferred Assets TAMC and the transferring institution share in the gain and losses generated by the assets under management. but not on an equal basis. The BoT has not conducted an examination of the TAMC in the sense that it would a commercial bank. management and staff of the TAMC cannot be held liable for their actions provided they carry out their duties in good faith.directors. Annual interest payments on the bonds are made in the form of 1-year floating rate bonds that carry at a rate not to exceed the average rate for all types of deposits of five commercial banks as determined by the TAMC's board of directors. 6. The annual report and audited financial statements are publicly disclosed. Privately owned financial institutions are only permitted to transfer multi-creditor NPLs.4.4 Asset Acquisition The rules governing the transfer of assets to the TAMC divide eligible financial institutions into two groups: those that are more than 50 percent owned by the government or FIDF and those financial institutions that are privately owned.2 Transfer Price of Assets The transfer price for assets acquired from government or FIDF owned financial institutions is the market value of underlying collateral whereas the price for assets transferred from private financial institutions is the lesser of the market value of the underlying collateral or the book value34 of the transferred assets minus statutory reserves (provisioning) required by the BoT. The TAMC will pay for the assets it acquires from the financial institution with 10 year non-negotiable.4. The Minister of Finance has the power of general supervision of the business of the TAMC. an annual basis. must be transferred to the TAMC. The TAMC is audited by the Office of the Auditor General every six months. (3) the aggregate book value of the borrower's debts to all creditors must be at least THB5 million.1 Asset Transfers All subquality assets owned by government or FIDF owned institutions as of 31 December 2000. 6. If transferors are private-sector AMCs. callable debt instruments guaranteed by the FIDF.

631
285. in million of THB State-owned finanicial institutions Private financial institutions Total
Transfer Tranche No.63 42.329 0 137. Finally. The fourth transfer occurred on 28 December 2001 and also consisted of multi-creditor loans from state and private financial institutions.52 5.4. a series of asset transfers comprising the fifth tranche began in June 2002. Through 30 June 2002. In total. 226 cases with a book value of THB285billion were transferred to TAMC.171 cases were transferred with a book value of THB114 billion. If a loss is suffered (i. 6. was transferred on 31 October 2001.5 billion were transferred to TAMC in this tranche Table 6.359 0 0 1.801 543 717.656 29. of Cases Book Value No.967 13.15
39
. Any additional gain will go. Instead. These assets are single-creditor loans with an individual book value of less than THB50 million from state-owned financial institutions.073 301.45
226 3. the amount recovered from the asset is less than the transfer price). 2001 Transfer Price(% of book value)
Source: TAMC
201536 73734 3472 543 580.4 Amount and Types of Transferred Assets Assets will not be transferred to the TAMC on an ongoing basis. The second tranche of assets.15%. only certain assets will be taken at certain times. shall not exceed the difference between the book value and the transfer price of the asset.000 cases with a total book value of approximately THB130 billion.083 % to peak NPLs % to total loans as of Sept.83 33. In total. is recorded. transferred on 15 October 2001. but when aggregated with the first 20 percent gain.acquisition price.631 cases with the total book value of THB718 billion in five tranches have been transferred to TAMC at an average transfer price to book value of 33. As of 30 June 2002.073 301.716 39. Preliminary estimates are that this tranche will contain some 60. any amount up to 20 percent of the transfer price of the asset will be shared equally between the TAMC and the transferring financial institution.073 cases transferred to the TAMC was THB301 billion. of Cases Book Value 1st Tranche 1. The total book value of the 1. 194 cases were transferred with a book value of THB17 billion. restricted to the 300 largest multi-creditor loans from both private and state owned financial institutions.e. not to exceed 20% of the transfer price will be borne by the transferring financial institution. the first part. of Cases Book Value No.644 10. in entirety to the transferring financial institution. Any gain above this amount will belong to the TAMC. 24 cases with the total book value of THB0.03 17.1 Transferred Assets As of 30 June 2002.012 49. Losses equal to an addition 20% of the transfer price will be shared equally between the TAMC and the transferring financial institution and any further losses will be the sole responsibility of the TAMC.171 194 24 4.16
107 750 165 0 992
83. The first tranche of assets. 4. consisted solely of single creditor loans with an individual book value in excess of THB50 million from government or FIDF owned financial institutions.359 2nd Tranche 205 3rd Tranche 2717 4th Tranche 66 5th Tranche 24 Total 4. 3.701 16.252 113. The third tranche consisted of lower value multi-creditor loans from both state and private financial institutions.

6.47%).53% were approved for debt/business restructuring or rehabilitation in the Bankruptcy court while the other 39. develop connection/find funding sources.7%) and manufacturing sector (28.
Transferred Assets By Sector as of December 2001
Import/Export 10% Banking/financial 6%
Others 11%
Manufacturing 28%
Services 10% Wholesale/retail trade 11%
Real estate 24%
40
. reorganise the business. to expedite the management process of the acquired subquality assets. However. TAMC set the half-year target for the resolved cases at THB200 billion and the whole-year target at 50% of the number of cases and 75% of the book value of transferred assets (around THB500 billion). As of Aug. TAMC still needs to resolve debtor cases of at least THB50 billion each month. respectively. it may restructure the debt. it reached the half-year target by being able to resolve cases with the total book value of THB201 billion. In June 2002. the number of resolved cases reached 800 with the total book value of THB293 billion. TAMC Board of Directors appointed the Subcommittee on Sectorial Restructuring to give advice on business/sectorial restructuring. and increase public awareness and understanding about their operation. TAMC expects to finish its asset management process within 5 years. Most of the resolved cases were in the real estate sector (31. TAMC has received cash repayment from its debtors in total of THB560 million. in order to meet the ambitious target of THB500 billion by the end of this year. TAMC aims to complete the resolution of all assets under its management within 2 years or by the end of 2003 and to spend 3 years after that (until the end of 2006) to monitor debt/business restructuring cases. as 28% and 24% of transferred assets as of December 2001 fell under these two sectors. Of the total book value. 6. The expected recovery rate from the cases resolved by debt/business restructuring and rehabilitation in the Bankruptcy Court as of June 2002 is 47. With regards to sectorial restructuring. In particular. 60. Up until July 2002.6.2 TAMC’s Future Plans TAMC established 4 main operation plans for the year 2002. In total.5.3% of their book value. or dispose/write off the asset and foreclose on the collateral. which is higher than the average transfer price of 33. which is 3 years sooner than what it previously anticipated.1 Resolution of Debtor Cases For the year 2002. final receivership of assets.47% were resolved by foreclosure of collaterals.5. 2002. or verdict by the Civil Court. facilitate the sectorial restructuring. i. TAMC chose manufacturing and real estate sectors as its first and second priorities. At the initial stage.e.5 Resolution of Transferred Assets The TAMCs ability to resolve and collect transferred assets is limited by the Law to certain strategies.15%.

Aiming to assist its potentially-viable debtors to find funding sources. mainly in the form of equity. but it will also coordinate with other specialized financial institutions. With the initial funding of USD500 million. Other measures include its cooperation with the Fiscal Policy Office on the Matching Fund Project.
41
. TAMC will not only provide an incentive for banks to grant new credits to its debtors. in debtors’ companies acquired by TAMC with a minimum investment in each company of USD5 million. the Matching Fund will invest.

nearly double the economy’s GDP of NTD9. In any case.4% of GDP) in 2001. repayment of interest past due for more than 6 months. The banking sector is also very large with over NTD20 trillion in total assets at year end-2002. private sector analysts estimate NPLs to be higher. the economy has been experiencing deflation on-and-off since late 2001. To wit.1 billion for other loans whose principal not overdue or has been overdue for less than 3 months but with interest payment overdue for more than 3 months but less than 6 months. with bigger banks and state-owned banks having even higher NPL ratios. which include NT$103. non-performing loans include loans with payments of principal not met for 3 months.
35
According to the Central Bank of China.1 billion for term loans overdue for 3 months but less than 6 months. S&P estimated the NPL ratio to be 15% while Goldman Sachs calculated to be 17.1 Background Despite being only mildly affected by the 1997 Asian crisis. Taiwan Cooperative Bank (2). Following the slowdown of the technology sector. Adding partial state ownership in other domestic banks.
Non-performing loans and ratios in Taiwan 1991-2002
1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 NPL in NT$ billion
Source: Central Bank of China
8 6 4 2 0
NPL ratio in %
The level of NPLs in Taiwan is high and also is rising until 2002. and instalment repayment loans for medium to long-term past due six months or more. At end-2002. Taiwan’s Asset Management Companies
7.7.5 billion for reached NPL standard but exempted from calculation with approval.12% (8. and NT$248. For example. the government plans to consolidate the banking sector and in an effort to do so. however. GDP shrank 2% and unemployment rose to above 5% during the year. the government’s share of total bank assets increases to almost 60%. the NPL ratio began to fall.35 The ratio of NPLs to total loans rose from just below 1% in 1991 to 7. The government has majority stakes in some of the largest banks in Taiwan. As a result.9% of GDP). deposits or loans. 36 foreign banks and over 300 community financial institutions serving a population of about 22 million. recently passed the Financial Holding Company Law that encourages bank mergers. loans under surveillance amounted to NT$386. Land Bank of Taiwan (3) and Central Trust of China (46). At end-2002. These banks account for approximately 27% of the total system whether measured in terms of assets. with 47 domestic banks. NT$35.
42
.5%. the Central Bank of China (CBC) began to report also loans under surveillance.8 billion. dropping to 6. in 2001 the Taiwanese economy experienced one of its worst recessions in 25 years.48 % (11.7 trillion. Recently. To address this overbanking problem. Taiwan has one of the most crowded and fragmented banking systems in the region. exports have also declined. including (domestic rank in terms of asset size shown in parenthesis): Bank of Taiwan (1).

1 trillion of NPLs at year-end 2002. These two actions by the government have resulted in an increase in banks’ profits by NTD93 billion in the past three years.74 9.527.53
7.2 Government involvement in NPL resolutions The government has taken measures to address the NPL problems. there has been relatively little progress in bank consolidation. mainly in the form of mortgage loans. NTD233 billion in 2001). the Taiwan Ratings Corp. has suggested that it might cost the government as much as NTD950 billion (10% of GDP) to clean up the banking system. the substantial decline in asset prices led to considerable amount of NPLs in property-related loans and loans that are collateralised with equities.77 6. Second. Among the NTD1.1 Asset quality analysis of local banks In NTD billion Dec 2001 Non-performing loans Total loans Loans under surveillance NPL ratio Ratio of NPL and loans under surveillance to total loans
Source: Central Bank of China
Dec 2002 864.12% 8. for example. Third. many banks lower their lending standards in an effort to attract customers.8 6. there is a history of lending to clients with political connections despite dubious business and poor credit histories.74 16.Table 7.29%
There are several causes for the NPL problems in Taiwan.130.46 47. Another 16% of the NPLs are loans to construction and real estate sectors. The MOF’s goal is to provide tax savings that could help the NPL ratio to fall below 5% by 2003. with particularly little interest shown by foreign banks in acquiring domestic banks. This suggests that previously performing loans are turning bad almost as fast as the already identified NPLs can be written off.7 386.4 552. the Ministry of Finance (MOF) reduced the gross business receipt tax (GBRT) from 5% to 2% and plans to eliminate it entirely by January 2006. in February 1999 the government cut required reserves on deposits.0 14.85%
1. Another government approach taken to address the NPL problem is to encourage bank consolidation through the passing of laws that offer tax breaks and other incentives for such activities.14 15.2 Non-performing loans by sectors In % Dec 2001 Manufacturing sector run by the private enterprises Commerce sector run by the private enterprises Construction and real estate sectors run by the private Individuals Others
Source: Central Bank of China
Dec 2002 18. NPLs remain high. Referring to all financial institutions. the Financial Institution Merger Law in November 2000 and the Financial Holding Company Law in November 2001. During the same period. in turn.10
20.61 11.4 14.
43
. NTD163 billion in 2000. over 45% are loans to individuals. Despite these initiatives. Specifically. First. Table 7. owing to the overcrowded banking sector and the resulting competition among banks.95 45. allow banks to write off NPLs.8 7.76 7. Both of these measures were taken with the intent of increasing profits and freeing cash that would.48% 11. Despite the aggressive actions being taken by banks to clean up their loan portfolios. a local partner of S&P. In addition. banks wrote off NTD536 billion of NPLs (NTD140 billion in 1999.087..

however. So far. and the remainder from insurance premiums collected by the Central Deposit Insurance Corporation (CDIC) over 10 years.4% at year-end 2001. Under the proposed but unconfirmed plan.47 billion) in NPLs. It has. The FRF also has the power to require insolvent institutions to cease operations and exit the market. which is still below the amount of government monies allocated to address collapsed banking systems in neighbouring countries. there are several private AMCs. the government is considering expanding the role of the Financial Restructuring Fund so that it will also act as an asset management company. TAMCO is the first private. President Chen endorsed a plan to speed up the pace of financial reforms. TAMCO announced that it planned to help banks dispose of more than NTD50 billion (USD1. such as the Chung Shing Bank and Kaoshiong Business Bank. is the first chairman of TAMCO. it has purchased only NTD1. Established by the Taiwanese Bankers’ Association in May 2001. allowing it to purchase troubled banks’ impaired assets for re-sale or to take ownership stakes in banks that have a capital ratio of below 8%. On 10 August 2001. including the one set up by the Taiwanese Bankers’ Association and others established through joint ventures between US investors and local banks. (TFASC). following an unofficial policy of “no bank failure”. The management of TAMCO believes that they have better knowledge and understanding of banks in Taiwan so that they can offer more competitive prices for bank assets than other investors. In late August 2002. which are of much larger size than the community banks. there were no public funds involved in the establishment of TAMCO. TAMCO has been very slow and cautious in addressing the NPL situation. the Fund took control of 36 farmers’ and fishermen’s credit cooperatives. Instead of asking other banks to take over the insolvent banks. TAMCO began to operate in early November 2001. Mr Lin Cheng-kuo.3 Financial Restructuring Fund (FRF) The Statue for the Establishment and Management of the FRF was enacted on 26 June 2001. For example. MOF is soliciting tender bids. According to the CDIC. The FRF is an entity established to facilitate the restructuring or liquidation of poor-quality assets of the banking industry. which is under the Ministry of Finance. following the model of the US Resolution Trust. about NTD80 billion of the FRF’s funds were used to pay the banks for this operation. all of which had negative capital and suffered from poor management. Other possible sources of funding are borrowings from the central bank and other banks as well as the issuance of FRF bonds. The FRF reports to the Bureau of Monetary Affairs. The so-called “2-5-8 plan” is designed to reduce the NPL ratio to below 5% and to raise each bank’s capital ratio to above 8% within two years. participated in public auctions of bank assets. Apart from the participation of state-owned banks. There is also a plan to increase funding to the FRF from NTD140 to NTD1. So far. has required a larger amount of FRF funding than the aforementioned credit cooperatives. the 300-plus credit cooperatives have a high NPL ratio of 16. the proposed plan has not yet obtained the legislative approval. The initial motivation behind the establishment of the FRF was to solve the high NPL ratio of the community financial institutions.050 billion or 11% of GDP. In June 2002. whereas the ratio for domestic banks is lower at 7. These institutions were subsequently taken over by 10 major banks. Its initial capital of NTD17. Thus far.62 billion (USD500 million) came from shareholders consisting of 33 local financial institutions.With the rising pressure to address the NPL problem more quickly. The government will provide capital to the FRF in the amount of NT$140 billion: NTD120 billion from the existing 2% GBRT levied on FI over a period of 4 years. It planned to buy NTD35 billion of NPLs directly from banks and act as an agent to sell another NTD15 billion in NPLs. the FRF will operate more like the RTC in the United States. former Minister of Finance.8 billion from one
44
. 7. domestic AMC founded in Taiwan.5%. 7.4 Taiwan Asset Management Corporation (TAMCO) The Merger Law of Financial Institutions (MLFI) enacted on 24 November 2000 provides the legal framework for the establishment and the operations of TAMCO and the Taiwan Financial Assets Service Co. The recent problems and still on-going resolution of several banks. While there is not yet a government-sponsored AMC. with the FRF providing interim liquidity support. the FRF’s activities have been limited.

The loss to First Commercial net of loan loss reserves amounted to almost NTD8 billion. majority state-owned First Commercial Bank sold NTD13 billion (USD370 million) of bad loans to Cerberus Asia in an auction conducted by Pricewaterhouse Coopers at 20% to 25% of face value. It also appraises the value of real estate collateral. First Commercial Bank sold NTD13. China Development AMC (CDAMC). In addition. which will substantially affect the bank’s financial results even when being absorbed by earnings over the next five years. only a fraction of the Taiwan’s over NTD1 trillion in bad loans. (TFASC). It is a licensed auction entity to help financial institutions to liquidate non-performing assets. TAMCO is negotiating with another 20 local banks to purchase portions of their problem loan portfolios and has signed MOUs with 10 banks for the sale of NTD30 billion of bad assets. a private AMC. To address the issue that banks and AMCs often disagree over NPL pricing. The bank sold an additional NT56 billion of NPLs in July 2002.2 billion to a private AMC for NTD3 billion.5 Other private resolutions Taiwan’s finance ministry has encouraged financial institutions to set up private asset management companies to clean up their bad debts after the passing of the MLFI.1 trillion NPLs in Taiwanese banks. Its small capital base of around NTD18 billion severely limited its role in NPL resolution. banks are reluctant to sell NPLs to TAMCO because the losses resulting from the sale would be realised immediately and would reduce their profits and adversely affect their financial performance. banks are still reluctant to sell to TAMCO because of the low price that will be received. mostly real estate acquired in satisfaction of debts. 7. TFASC cannot deal with banks directly but banks can use TFASC through TAMCO.local bank.5 billion coming from 30 local banks. For example. This is the first open bidding for NPLs in Taiwan.46 billion worth of bad loans from CDFH at a cost of NTD2 billion. Chang Hwa Commercial Bank and state-owned Taiwan Cooperative Bank have announced plans to sell NTD5 billion of NPLs each to TAMCO. In addition. was set up by the Taiwanese Bankers’ Association to evaluate the pricing of NPLs. in partnership with US-based Lone Star Investment. In total. It has an initial capital of NTD1. Lone Star Investment will contribute 60% to 70% of the capital of NTD8 to 20 billion to establish CDAMC. China Development Financial Holding (CDFH) is creating. an impartial third party. in March 2002. losses resulting from the sale of problem loans to AMCs can be written off over 5 years.
45
. So far. TAMCO has made only a marginal impact on the over NTD1.For example. sales of problem assets to private AMCs have amounted to roughly NTD27 billion. Notwithstanding the fact that under Article 15 of the Financial Institution Law. which plans to purchase NTD4. the Taiwan Financial Assets Service Co.

Speeches of the former Governor Singson. They include a less reliance on capital inflows. These initiatives include
36
In addition to banks. dominance of private banks in the system and certain preventive measures that were put in place before the crisis. Like many other banking systems in the region. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP). The higher capital requirements were required to be complied with by December 1998. the Philippines also suffered during the Asian financial crisis. Before the Asian financial crisis.8. Non-Stock Savings & Loan Association. Banking System in the Philippines
8. and the Peso to depreciate more than 50% against the US Dollar from PHP27 in June 1997 to PHP40 by December 1997. Lending Investors. for regular commercial banks by 60 percent. the Philippine economy was growing steadily as evidenced by the country’s real GDP growth from near-zero in the early 1990s to about 6% in 1996.2 Measures to Strengthen the Banking System After the Financial Crisis Since the government and BSP viewed the problems of the Philippines’ financial system as relatively less severe than those in its neighbouring countries. Finance Companies. the BSP has implemented a number of banking reform measures since the crisis. “The Philippines: Capitalizing on sustained financial stability”. there were some 7. 11 November 1998
37
46
. stock savings and loans associations. but to a relatively lesser degree. lending during the height of the crisis did contract as banks became more concerned about credit quality and sensitive to losses. Preventive measures put in place before the crisis include an imposition by the BSP of a 20% limit on real estate loans to total loans outstanding and in 1996.3% in 1997. Although the rural banks and thrift banks are the greatest in terms of numbers. Unfortunately. Despite being affected by the Asian economic crisis. Venture Capital. they did not spend the enormous amounts of money on the clean up of NPLs and recapitalize the banking system that other Asian countries did. In addition. From July 1997 to the end of 1998. With the long-term view of promoting a sound. It should be noted that like many other Asian countries. commercial banks dominated the banking system with roughly 90% of banking system assets. however. and competitive financial system. Investment Companies. the BSP rescue measures were limited to providing liquidity support to the banks in the form of fully-collateralized emergency loans if and when a run on the bank was experienced.7% in 1996 to 10. Mutual Building and Loan Association. The crisis caused real GDP growth to slide into negative territory in 1998. the Philippines has made considerable economic progress since the bottom was hit in 1997 and 1998. 124 thrift banks (savings banks. only one commercial bank and seven thrift banks . The concentration of assets in commercial banks continues to hold true today36. At the time. claims that there are several reasons why banks in the Philippines possessed less NPLs and were relatively stronger than banks in other Asian countries37.with combined assets of 0. real lending interest rates decreased to 8. and for the bigger MetroManila based thrift banks by 67 percent. These included Investment Houses. Pawnshops. Securities Dealers/Brokers. these non-bank financial institutions accounted for approximately 20 percent of the financial system’s resources. the Philippines’ banking system was negatively affected by the Asian financial crisis. Although NPLs did increase during the Asian crisis.41% of GDP failed. the banking system in the Philippines consisted of 54 commercial banks. GDP has begun to increase with growth since 1999 being reported at an annual rate of about 3-4%. stable.085 non-bank financial institutions as of December 1997.5% in August 1998. the real lending interest rate to increase to from 5.1 Background Prior to July 1997. and Private and Government Insurance Companies. Principally. it was from a low of 4. the Peso has continued to depreciate against the US Dollar with a low of PHP50 in 2001. Conversely. For instance.7% of total loans in December 1997 to a still relatively manageable 10. private development banks. and micro finance). an increase in the the minimum capital requirement for universal banks by 80 percent. and 832 rural banks. 8. the Central Bank of the Philippines.7% in 1998 with rates now in the rage of 6 – 7%.

7% in May 2002. To help accelerate the rule-upgrading process and to encourage a deeper reform. which is the legal ground for the reforms. More recently.2%.8%. banks in the Philippines have been more reluctant to extend credits. and good corporate governance.38 trillion in August 2002. To combat the growth in NPLs.
47
. both ratios showed improvement with banks turning in performance numbers equating to 0. Initial capital requirements for an AMC established under the SAMC Law is PHP500 million (USD9 million). respectively. Due to the shift in focus from generally higher yielding loans to government securities. was enacted in May 2000. aiming to help accelerate the clean up process of the banks’ non-performing assets. (3) make the bank licensing requirements for stringent. the main focus of the reform has been on the promotion of fewer but stronger and more competitive players in the banking industry by encouraging mergers and acquisitions and allowing the entry of strong foreign players. This bill permits the establishment of third-party. respectively. mergers and consolidations among banks have been encouraged. private sector owned AMCs. which ultimately became law on 23 May 2000. and allows them to purchase bad loans from banks. incentives are provided in the form of certain tax exemptions and fee privileges. the ratio of NPLs-to-total loans in the banking system increased from 10. the Philippine Congress passed a Special Asset Management Companies Law (SAMC Law).4% as of December 1998 to 18.2000 and even contracted from PHP1. it comes as no surprise that the return on assets and return on equity ratios of the Philippines’ banking system decreased from 0.4 Further Measures and Reforms The high NPL figure remains a major concern of the Philippines banking system. stronger. What lies ahead is implementation of these reform measures. Full recovery of the banking system will depend heavily on the success in implementing these measures and the acceptance of the private sector led AMCs. Several rules and regulations have been revised and issued. having chosen instead to invest their resources in less risky assets. however.45 trillion in December 2000 to PHP1. With increasing asset quality concerns. efficiency and competitiveness. particularly government securities. 8.7% to 3. Along with passage of the SAMC Law. As a result.7% and 4. the BSP strongly supported the enactment of a new General Banking Act. (2) make the loan classification and provisioning requirements more strict.1% as of June 2002. the government and BSP. efficiency and transparency. 8. the Philippines’ banking system has not yet fully recovered from the crisis. The first initiative is designed to strengthen the supervisory framework through the implementation of consolidated and risk-based supervision. The BSP has made significant progress on these three main areas. the total loans grew at an extremely slow pace during 1998 . and more competitive banks.measures to (1) further increase in minimum capital requirements ranging from 20 to 60% (depending upon the type of financial institution) over 1998 minimum levels (to be completed by year 2000). More importantly. enhanced disclosure requirements. In this regard. the legislation prohibits banks themselves from owning more than 5% of any AMC that purchases bad loans and assets. The second is to further reform the local banking system to achieve greater safety. (4) promote good risk management systems and practices. The third initiative is designed to enhance the banks’ corporate governance and enhance the role of market discipline. Capital adequacy ratios for the banking system remained high at 16. To encourage the AMCs to purchase NPLs from banks. and (5) provide for consolidated and riskbased supervision.8% in 1998 to 0.4% in 2001 and from 5. Moreover. on 18 December 2002. The General Banking Law.3 Recent Performance of the Banking System Although considered less severely affected by the regional financial crisis. for the first half of 2002. The number of banks in the Philippines has continued to decrease after the crisis due to the closure of problem banks and the merger and acquisition of surviving banks. These measures aim to ensure that banks are well-managed and operated with good risk management system. aiming to create bigger. the BSP is implementing three initiatives to strengthen the Philippines’ banking system. Importantly.